Here:
https://
station.terra.money/proposal/10994
@awhitehouse - Problems alone my friend means someone has a vested interest in it… Not for me my friend these demagogy and problems. I will register myself. Thank you for your opinion, thanks to it I know who is who - [a white house] 
Personally, I think that LUNC and Luna Classic are very nice and do not sound old or obsolete. The name is not important what is important is the COIN and what it does. Let’s focus on the important stuff and repeg it USTC as soon as possible.
Trust me when I say, for retail newcomers that don´t know anything about picking altcoins/projects, the name is their first impression and many will ask: “Why Classic” and once they know the history behind “Classic” they´ll run… I know from experience. So, for you might seem a nothing burger with no relevance. You are wrong. Droping the “Classic” will do a lot of good to the project.
1 Like
They will know the history anyway the name does not matter. LUNA means Moon therefore the 21 days unstacking period. Luna One sounds like the Mini One (car). LUNO sounds so strange as LUNA is feminine and LUNO is masculine.
The name of the Mars’s moons could be used instead (should we change the unstacking period?) FOBOS or DEMIOS.
Personally, I do not agree and I will vote NO, but I will accept democratically what the majority decides.
1 Like
Thanks for the input although personally I don’t agree re the name - I totally agree with the repeg, but cant see this happening and even if it did who would use it as a stable coin in all honesty? I think that part would definitely need to be rebranded and possibly pegged at a smaller amount or even another fiat currency other than a dollar, perhaps the Pound or even something like gold? This would add a different angle to a stable coin.
Agree, I want to see a repeg for sure, but unless the project (LUNC) has a complete (re)makeover, no one will use UST as a trustworthy “Stable”, as fear would still linger as it coud de-peg as it did in the past. The re-peg has to be very well planned and worked to ensure trust, and that comes with time. I see a lot of people wanting to use LUNC and UST as a way to get rich fast, but this is not the way. I want the repeg too, I´ll have a good bag of UST and LUNC once it repegs, but I want it done well even if it takes time.
…and then, there are these MASSIVE TOOLS, that vote “No with veto” on serious proposals, because they are mean SoB´s that just want to see LUNC and other´s burn.
Might make a proposal to make “No with veto” only for spam proposals and any validator that uses the “No with veto” on serious proposals should get their node rewards slashed. These guys are those type of people that do not have any constructive arguments or actions to make… only destructive ones. Shamefull to see this type of people in this community, running nodes nonetheless. At least I know which validators to avoid.
1 Like
I thought the same! Harsh that people I stake my coins with vote no with veto! All my coins are staked and not on exchanges because I am in this for the long haul. If Validators don’t agree a simply no would suffice! Or if on the fence abstain. Im not wealthy by a long shot and lost lots in the terra crash, put forward a reasonable proposal to get no with veto votes, what can I say!
1 Like
Yes… it makes one think., does it not? Just goes to show the hubris on them and how intelectually lazy they are, that doesn´t even go to their mind that they might be voting no with veto to one of their own depositors. The ultimate lack of respect. You learn a lot seeing how governance operates in these projects and LUNc has its rotten apples for sure. Let this calm down and I just migh write that proposal, to which they will certainly vote “No with veto”… oh the irony.
And now, more than ever, I want your proposal to pass…
Take your coins out of their nodes and put them in respectfull ones. There´s no harm nor hard feeling in voting NO, as you said. But these as**oles? fuc*em.
(I hope they also read this…)
1 Like
I told myself I wouldn’t take a no vote to heart as everyone is entitled to an opinion. But a Veto vote is definitely stepping on the little guy! Im surprised that a validator would do that, it does make you realise who is best and rational when it comes to staking and those who don’t care about your staked money!
1 Like
LUNO ?
First of all, I agree to change the name, the second I don’t think “One” is the proper term, if we want LUNA to be a competitive coin we should not limit it to “One $”, this community has a smart intelligent people so I know will find a better one.
There´s a lot of choices that one can think of. At this point I think the important part is to drop the “Classic” and leave it behind where it belongs.
The Dev team can pick a name and ticker that doesn´t have to be necessarly TERRA ONE or LUNA ONE (LUNO). I for exemple proposed Terra Genesis (LUNG) and everyone seemed to hate.
Theres lot of choices:
for exemple “Revolution” - The time it takes to revolve around the sun (in earth´s case) or the earth (in the moon case). And it would also be fitting, since we want to see LUNA get back to the point it once was.
moonconnection.---- com/moon-glossary.phtml
It might not even have to do with astronomy terms…For me LUNA ONE isn´t so bad, but I don´t mind the dev team to use their “big brains” and choose. As long as it as some sort of meaning and it isn´t “classic”.
1 Like
I think this is a good idea, we can go with Luna One rather than classic.
After seeing how Ethereum Classic is treated, a name change is ideal
I think Prime is more fitting, Luna One suggests the one before Luna 2.0 took over. Luna Prime says to me, the first, but also, most important !
How about Nova Luna or Nova Terra? (Meaning new New Moon or New Earth)
Ticker LUNN
Seems fitting and is a pretty inocuous naming.
I think it should start with Luna.
My vote would be for Luna Genesis (LUNG).
Followed by Luna One then Luna Prime.
Genesis is both the birth of something new, the origin of something, and has a cool sci-fi feel to it.
But each to their own!
How about “new Coke”. This is an awful idea, will be voting No with Veto. Don’t mess with the brand, especially now that is starting to establish itself. Maybe they meant it in a negative way to brand us with “Classic” but we own it now, we embrace it… $LUNC 
What has coke got to do with Luna? Thanks for voting no with Veto rather than just no, it really is appreciated. Seriously some people in here make the environment just feel toxic for no point other than spite and don’t contribute themselves! No point putting a proposal forward with people with this mindset in the community!
I thought and so do others this was a reasonable suggestion worth talking about and that’s what this coin is about, sharing ideas, if people don’t agree simply say no or offer another suggestion. I think if the poll was change the name without a suggestion but move away from classic I reckon the majority would say it is a good idea. This is my first proposal and I followed the suggestions by posting in here first etc to the letter. It’s not necessary to put people off from offering up proposals, as one of those could be the thing that makes a big difference but by shooting people down with that attitude may put off others from speaking out, it certainly hasn’t stopped scammers from spamming proposal after proposal.
2 Likes