CZ Binance Response To Fork Plan!

It doesn’t matter what you like. In investing and finances what matters is fairness. You invested in garbage. The whole protocol collapsed so you were holding a heavily overpriced coin. It’s real value is its current value. So everyone buying now, is buying at its fair price. It is you who bought an overpriced shitcoin so now you carry the consequences for it.

1 Like

CZ working harder than luna team. lol

3 Likes

Yes, the asset was heavily overbought.
But not directly on so much)
Who sold on the fall is to blame himself.
From the rest, you can shake out coins in the usual way, with long volatility, dumps, and so on. Only with connection to exchanges of robots.
But this is a very long time and still billions of almost free coins will remain on hand.
Because many are only looking for how to get rich with minimal risk.
This path will definitely be different.

Yes, but still no fork is needed. The current price is Luna’s real value. The attack exposed that their protocol was completely flawed and it’s 100$ price was wayyyyyy tooo much. All these Luna holders are now complaining about unfairness, but there is nothing unfair. They bought an expensive shitcoin. When you do a bad investment, you take responsibility for your losses instead of trying to steal from others to cover those losses.

2 Likes

This! Very sad actually. Meanwhile do Kwon trying to make a fork and increase the scrutiny from law enforcement and regulators. He goes forward with the fork and he’s going to jail likely and will kill Terra and everything they built so far. No one will list the fork and will get absolutely no support from the ct community

2 Likes

Fork can work, and has worked before.

Look at what Ethereum and ETC did in 2016.

Ethereum is a fork from original Ethereum Classic.

If the community view the forked chain as the primary chain, this chain will carry the most value forward.

The current $LUNA and $UST can be $LUNA-Classic and $UST-Classic.

New $LUNA2 and $UST2 can be forked, but will need better economics. E.g. new $UST2 cannot be issued with same 1:1 ratio, but instead will need to be issued at a discount.

The ecosystem won’t work with $18B outstanding $UST.

1 Like

Yes, as far as the coin itself is concerned, it would be fair to simply burn the coins, buying off the excess, until they are next to nothing.
Who bought for how much is not so important, although many are offended by the huge losses)
Thank you for pushing another argument in my favor)
I have a couple of coins in my portfolio that are worth nothing at all) The entire portfolio is in a drawdown of more than 50%
And some coins fell by 80 or even 98% … so now I have to throw myself at those who are buying them now and insist that I am a good investor, but they are bad speculators?))

That was a completely different situation. It has been explained in detail already

1 Like

For those who think the opinions of people who favor the fork and loathe the burn are meaningless, apparently Do Kwan doesn’t agree. What we little people think may not matter but what he thinks probably does. I can never agree with the burn if it’s juts a legacy holder burn. Never. But I appreciate other people who stand to make a lot of money right now and would in fact lose a lot with the fork won’t agree. When you want to understand the motivations of people for what they do and don’t support, it’s simple enough. Always follow the money.

Appreciate the honesty though from some of the commenters who are frank enough to admit that no legacy holder or anyone who is still staked since before the attack should support the burn option unless they are willing to lose essentially their entire investment. All of those people should support the fork.

I see some efforts at a burn proposal that try to compensate the legacy holders. But if they are like the one you’re proposing, only the people who bought after the attack should support them.

As far as it being a bad coin, if the only weakness was a sophisticated, well financed, malicious, multi-pronged attack that required hundreds of millions of dollars to implement, then that’s something even worse than a hack in terms of evil and damage done and if there is any possible way an undo is possible, that’s what should happen. If it’s not the same as Etherium, no legacy holder should care. It’s close enough. In the ways it’s different, so what? Break new ground and make history as we eat our losses with this magic fork instead of setting our whole life savings on fire by burning them to ash. At least I’m for compensating the people who came into the distressed system as is Kwan with giving them a 10% stake in the new system. The burn way you’re proposing gives legacy holders essentially a .0005 or less % stake in the burned down Luna system, or practically nothing when they had it all compared to the bottom feeders who will get quite a bit with the fork compared to their contribution. They contributed a lot less than 10% to the Terra Luna system so watching the greed in play where they as Johnny come latelys want to ride in like raiders and take from the people who built the system really tests one’s faith in humanity.

It’s a nice conversation. Let’s put a dollar figure on it. If someone had a million dollars in Luna before the attack, how much would they have after the dust settles with the burn system?

And how much might they have in the alternative system with the fork?

My guess is they’d be lucky to have $100 after the burn and they’d probably have $50k to $100k with the fork with the potential, since the supply is only a billion tokens, for it to go back up to a million after a few years. With the burn getting from over 9 trillion tokens to down to a billion is just a pie in the sky proposition. It’ll never get there. And it was only 343 million before the attack, so going to a billion is still a haircut. But with the burn it’d be lucky to ever get down to hundreds of billions and as it burns the price goes up so the cost of burning goes up too. With that dynamic, realistically the burn system would probably only be able to burn a few hundred billion tokens and would never ever even get lower than 8 trillion let alone down to a billion. Do Kwan obviously understands this.

The pro-burners do not.

It really looks more like the pro-burners aren’t trying to save the system but instead are just out for a quick buck, made on the backs of those who’ve been investing for years.

You are literally advocating for the end of the ecosystem and the team in jail for fraud

It’s basically like a bankruptcy and restructuring. All the latecomers are compensated with 10% in the new system. Honestly, that’s more than fair. Frankly, it’s too generous. But fine. I can live with that.

Nothing illegal about a bankruptcy and restructuring and rising out of the ashes as a new entity. Sometimes the old investors get nothing at all. The fork is giving the most to the most deserving people and giving something to everyone.

For those who think the opinions of people who favor the fork and loathe the burn are meaningless, apparently Do Kwan doesn’t agree. What we little people think may not matter but what he thinks probably does. I can never agree with the burn if it’s juts a legacy holder burn. Never. But I appreciate other people who stand to make a lot of money right now and would in fact lose a lot with the fork won’t agree. When you want to understand the motivations of people for what they do and don’t support, it’s simple enough. Always follow the money.

Appreciate the honesty though from some of the commenters who are frank enough to admit that no legacy holder or anyone who is still staked since before the attack should support the burn option unless they are willing to lose essentially their entire investment. All of those people should support the fork.

I see some efforts at a burn proposal that try to compensate the legacy holders. But if they are like the one you’re proposing, only the people who bought after the attack should support them.

As far as it being a bad coin, if the only weakness was a sophisticated, well financed, malicious, multi-pronged attack that required hundreds of millions of dollars to implement, then that’s something even worse than a hack in terms of evil and damage done and if there is any possible way an undo is possible, that’s what should happen. If it’s not the same as Etherium, no legacy holder should care. It’s close enough. In the ways it’s different, so what? Break new ground and make history as we eat our losses with this magic fork instead of setting our whole life savings on fire by burning them to ash. At least I’m for compensating the people who came into the distressed system as is Kwan with giving them a 10% stake in the new system. The burn way you’re proposing gives legacy holders essentially a .0005 or less % stake in the burned down Luna system, or practically nothing when they had it all compared to the bottom feeders who will get quite a bit with the fork compared to their contribution. They contributed a lot less than 10% to the Terra Luna system so watching the greed in play where they as Johnny come latelys want to ride in like raiders and take from the people who built the system really tests one’s faith in humanity.

It’s a nice conversation. Let’s put a dollar figure on it. If someone had a million dollars in Luna before the attack, how much would they have after the dust settles with the burn system?

And how much might they have in the alternative system with the fork?

My guess is they’d be lucky to have $100 after the burn and they’d probably have $50k to $100k with the fork with the potential, since the supply is only a billion tokens, for it to go back up to a million after a few years. With the burn getting from over 9 trillion tokens to down to a billion is just a pie in the sky proposition. It’ll never get there. And it was only 343 million before the attack, so going to a billion is still a haircut. But with the burn it’d be lucky to ever get down to hundreds of billions and as it burns the price goes up so the cost of burning goes up too. With that dynamic, realistically the burn system would probably only be able to burn a few hundred billion tokens and would never ever even get lower than 8 trillion let alone down to a billion. Do Kwan obviously understands this.

The pro-burners do not.

It really looks more like the pro-burners aren’t trying to save the system but instead are just out for a quick buck, made on the backs of those who’ve been investing for years.

Could also just do the fork anyway and make the new system but take little to nothing away from the old one, if that’s possible. It’s pretty much kaput anyway. Like the Snowpiercer option. Split the train.

The old system goes it’s way and the new one goes it’s own way. Then you can try the burn if you want to and see how it works while the people on the fork try the reset.

Lol. You must be kidding. So everyone that bought Luna after 8 May they just get whiped out ? You are insane or a clown. Ethereum never did such a scam as the one you are proposing.

3 Likes

Everyone that bought Luna after May 8th gets 10% of the fork.

With the burn everyone that bought after the hyperinflation of the token gets 99.999995% or more of the burned down system compared to anyone who had it before as is obvious when you just divide the 343 million lunas in circulation compared with the 6.5 trillion now so everyone that built the system up over the years gets .00527% of the new system.

Basically, for investing much less than 10% the latecomers are getting 10%. And their investment is more like .005% if that.

That’s scam. If everyone that entered after 8 May own 50 % of the coins, they should also get 50 % of the coins for the new fork. If you give them 10 %, you stole 40 % of them. That is theft and will lead to lawsuits that will end up in jailing the Luna team.

1 Like

no, crazy idea

Cz is an insensitive, unscrupulous and greedy crook who does not have any empathy or sympathy for the people who have suffered due to the debacle of LUNA and UST. On 13th of May when most investors were getting clobbered Binance made around 7 billion dollars in trading fees (maker/taker at 0.1%) alone. You can see that the 24 hour volume at one point in time on the 13th of May was 7 trillion dollars. He wanted the chain to be revived and trading to continue only because he was losing millions of dollars on trading fees alone, not because he was trying to save the investors from suffering any loss. And add to that he has the cheek to bad mouth a big community based project and the revival efforts being taken up by the community members. We do hope BNB/BUSD pair crashes soon once Binance gets banned across the world based on the proposed tactical move by China on
Taiwan or some such future development! Waiting for something like that to happen so that he can understand the pain of the suffering masses.

No because you have to prorate it based on the inflation.

Obviously we’ll never agree. Somebody who bought a billion coins for a penny isn’t going to want some small fraction of 10% of a billion coins in the fork. But equally obviously, somebody who had hundreds of thousands of Lunas before the attack isn’t going to want someone who bought millions of times that amount for less than a dollar to now have billions more Lunas and make the ones that were worth millions before worth only pennies.

That would literally be insane.

Unless there is a way to get beyond the zero sum game, no legacy holder should ever support the burn over the fork. That’s just one financial disaster on top of another.

I can’t be surprised though by latecomers wishing for the burn. That’s fine. Greed is good. Hopefully Do Kwan never does that though and protects the people who built his baby while also showing due consideration for those who came later.

1 Like

Basically with the burn Luna would be lucky to ever see a trading price of a penny. Ever. Only the people who bought under a penny would ever make a dime.

With the fork it could possibly go up to $30 within a year or so and even more over time.

Everyone saying it won’t be listed or it’s illegal, well all of that can be negotiated. We’ll never know if we never try. If it’s tried and Terra team does it’s level best but it just can’t be done, then so be it; burn it. But not to try at all would be the real crime.

But the burn won’t work. With the burn terra-luna will always be penny-ante. Mathematically, there is no possible way to burn even a small fraction of 6.5 trillion Luna and get the price up more than small fractions of a cent.

Honestly, most of the burn crowd knows this but figures the thousand dollars they bought at .000243 or even way lower will get them hundreds of thousands if not over a million if it ever goes up even to .01, and even that’s wildly optimistic, and then the ecosystem will be abandoned and collapse because they were never in it for the long haul and the people who were in the long haul essentially got totally liquidated and could never recover anything.

The latecomers are just in it to make a quick buck. Nobody is buying the idea that they just got here but they really care about the idea of Terra-Luna. That’s why the fork is the only reasonable chance for long term survival.

And you talk about nobody will trust it. A lot more people will trust it, especially all the people who built it up and have been in it for years, than will trust the burn option that disposes of the legacy holders like yesterday’s trash. That’s what will 100% destroy Terra-Luna.

Do the math. With only 343 million Lunas, it went from .12 to $119 over a period of years. That’s about a 100000%. A 1000x. At .00025, if it goes up that much it will reach 1 dollar. That’s the optimistic version for the people who lost at $80.

Now you factor in the inflation of 6.5 trillion tokens verses 343 million. The math on that is just devastating. Terra can never even see a penny.

The fantasy about ever being able to burn enough Luna to put a dent in those numbers can never come true.

No, that’s not true. You bought a shitcoin at too high price. The inflation is a result of that. You did a terrible investment and now that you lost all your money you want to rewrite history to cover your losses and bail yourself out. Investing doesn’t work like that. The forking proposal will never be successfull. The team will end in jail. Luna is still worth almost nothingn so if you believe in it for the longrun, you are still free to buy lots of Luna for a penny on the price.

6 Likes