No that’s not even close to reality. The reason one cannot “contact” the exchanges to burn is the fact that no one CAN speak on behalf of the chain. They will not talk to anyone who doesn’t have authority over the chain and even if they did speak with, there could be no action taken.
Until TFL is removed from the picture, that will will be very hard change.
That said I am NOT leading LUNC or want to. I DO want to work with a team and do my part in the rebuilding of it, and believe it can be a great token again. LUNC will become a Community governed token maintaind by a team. Its pretty simple really, but apparently also complicated.
Have you noticed that there are much more serious problems in the community? In general there is misinformation that creates tensions, wrong impressions, etc.
because there are many articles and videos that say inaccuracies and they are transmitted by word of mouth at the speed of light. you have to make announcements.
half say Do kwon has the last word on every decision ,the other half do not.Fear and confidence prevail that no proposal will be implemented, both because Do Kwon will say no the same goes for the exchanges.We need detailed updates one by one in order to reduce doubts, misinformation and misperceptions of the facts. A great clarification of the goals. To put an end to this situation of discord and insecurity.Propaganda is the worst for our effort. so clear details and constant valid information.
I do not know if LUNC will be fully integrated into the community. Some say that this can not be done. They say Do Kwon has the last word and what can really happen. There are many people who say inaccuracies. They confuse many people in the community and prevent others from buying LUNC because they feel insecure about what they have heard …
How ignorant one should be to understand the obvious.
1.2% tax is going to k i l l the rest of the network. Why would anyone pay this much transaction fee ? There are hundreds of other coins offering transaction fee is fraction of cents.
Whoever wants this tax implemented they want the LUNC terminated (what ever left) or simply stupid speculator.
The only way to increase true value is adoption and use case of the coin. For this we need small transaction fee, good allocation of coins among groups, and huge number of developers team and ideas to implement. That’s the only way, long but only!
Burn is possible by buying back from market or burn your own tokens for free.
Everyone knows that best way of using buyback for burning, but LUNC has not established funds so far, So only accumulate funds through transaction fees and taxes. If 80,000 btc can be traced back, of course No one need proposal 4095！
Maybe you’re right, maybe not. These proposals were put to the vote and people said YES clearly and loudly regardless of the risk.You have to understand that we are talking about a coin where Do Kwon killed it. All this collective effort with the approval of the community aims to reverse the current situation towards for a better and more beneficial future.What we care most about, I think, is when the changes will take place, when they will be implemented. I think it is easier for the community to know details such as the date of implementation.This waiting without evidence raises doubts and leads many people to listen to the nonsense said by some irrelevant.Anyway if these plans fail we will make new ones, maybe one of them is to burn our own tokens.
Assuming validator delegation is actually reauthorized, everything will have to be put to a new vote. “Valid votes” approved by .001% of LUNC in circulation are not valid votes.
I agree with @Navruzbek that a 1.2% transaction tax is a bad idea. We need more users, not less. More liquidity and more trading activity - not less.
A lower trading tax like .5% will spur much more trading volume. The end result in terms of revenue would be similar but the UX would be better and liquidity would also be much better.
People said yes hoping this will create enough volume them to quite with better position! If you implement and it fails there will be nothing to more to give new proposals. I don’t see even one valid point why we should implement 1.2% tax which is worse than current fiat system.
These changes already PASSED. It will be uploaded, but for now we are waiting for code change completation. These changes also have to be uploaded to the code by restarting chain. To safe our and validators time I think it will be uploaded with recently passed stacking reenable proposal. Since this changes already passed i dont understand why you still comment “We dont need this change” Please stop spam. If you dont want this change you can make new proposal and vote. (after new validators can be created) Please create new topic for this like “We don´t want burn mechanism on transactions 1,2 %”
Do not understand why? the purpose is to have a burn that will help the currency in the short term. No matter what they say you do not offer anything without benefit. Here we are talking about money, not charity. Their announcements are not clear, they are meaningless and vague. When you ask a group or a community for support you need to be clear with their members and keep up to date with developments consistently and in detail. You must show them that you are loyal. For me there is no transparency. When you make a plan there is also a schedule and time margins. Something that does not apply here.
I will agree. The proposals were put to the vote and the majority decided. These decisions must be accepted and respected by all. I would advise all those who do not want these proposals to create new ones and propose them I would really like to see them. Something good may come out of it. But I would like you to give some time to the other proposals that passed. The best judge is time based on the results.
Entire community need to brainstorm about ideas “To Make Exchanges implement 1.2% Tax”
The noise that we made till now is restricted to social media, Do you guys think if this goes to mainstream media there will be some response from TFL/Binance?
If Yes we need contacts in Mainstream media to publish our story.
Only charging sellers is the best option. Because the seller’s motive is profit or stop loss, they can receive tax. This can also inhibit malicious shorting.
Fyi everyone who is freaking out over the tax, you guys havent bought safemoon have you? Theres a massive following behind safemoon and they have a bigger tax than this 1.2%.
Just so you know, nobody cares about a tax, especially if it helps burn a coin which is exactly what safemoon is doing. Like everyone else is saying, if you dont like it then make your own proposal and see how well it does. Im pretty sure orions whole community supported the tax in the first place which is why orion voted yes. As well as the 27 other validators. Literally not one validator voted no on the tax.
And for everyone else saying theres nothing left for this coin and its never coming back, why are you even here wasting your time and breath? You trying to scare people so you can buy low? I see through you guys. Not my first rodeo.