This isn’t just a line of code you can toggle ON/OFF.
Was adding an If statement!
All this time I was waiting someone to bring this up! I think it is a very nice idea Vegas! Could this be a new proposal ?
1 Like
The reason that LUNA v1, when staked, is able to partake in governance, is because it is the mining coin that provides the consensus voting power that secures the blockchain fault tolerance, as well as minimizes the impact of fluctuations on the mining/validation. The stables on the other hand were meant to find their practical value in being a stable representation of their real world counterparts. I gather this from information in the Terra Whitepaper:
That does not mean that the stable coins are not an integral part of the system in terms of how it was, and currently is, designed (of course recognizing that due to the crash, a portion of the system is not working as it was designed). But, to enable the stable coins to participate in governance would be a change to the governance model at minimum, and to the consensus model at maximum, and may undercut the proof-of-stake design, and provide hidden advantages, and disadvantages, that make the system less stable from a design perspective (unless the coins were providing the exact same purpose).
If the purpose is for people to use UST, or one of the other stable coins designed into the system, in some type of lockup and to further invest, in my estimation that should be done in a different place than in the native staking system or at the L1 level. I do like ideas though that continue to emphasis the importance of UST, and other stable coins, and their holders, to the ecosystem. However, I think the idea of allowing UST to be staked with all the same rights and benefits of LUNA v1, as an idea, may cut deeply against the design, and network stability, in terms of:
-
mining power protections in volatility that happen with the design of the LUNA v1 coin,
-
via governance UST and stable coins do not have the natural interests built in to their purpose that would look to protect the network stability in the longer term,
-
and of the purpose behind both LUNA v1 on the one hand (being a mining/validation coin, and the working liquidity to back “stable” coins), and the “stable” coins on the other hand (the stable coins being the “underlying currency” of dApps that are built on the blockchain).
I do realize that does not mean the system can not be changed, I just wanted to point out why they designed the system the way it is designed.