Final Vision Plan for LUNC to $1+

[JESUSisLORD]

@ONLY

there are a lot of words written in this proposal, but no mechanism has been proposed for the implementation of forcing exchanges to introduce a tax, and no mechanism for controlling burning on exchanges has been proposed.
How are you going to force - force the exchanges to agree with you and impose a tax on all transactions within the exchange?

My plan is not about FORCING exchanges. We cannot force them. The other proposal with blacklisting is NOT GOOD. We cannot blacklist exchanges that will be a disaster. I’ll be voting NO on that prop.

My plan is about encouraging exchanges and incentivising them using the internal wallet whitelist, and deposits to their exchanges being exempt from the 1.5% on-chain tax. This tax incentivises LUNC sellers to use participating exchanges for a 0.3% tax saving. They are also incentivised by the other methods including L1TF reaching out, the way the plan is structured to have a simultaneous launch, and positive community pressure.

@ONLY

We have already passed this road once, when CZ said no, and we could not do anything about it, so if CZ says no again, and you propose to lose my 6 months of life on a non-working offer?

CZ didn’t say no. He said first put the tax on-chain. We did, then after only 3 weeks it was removed, not giving enough time to negotiate with exchanges. In that short time we achieved CZ offering the 1.2% burn tax opt-in, and burning his fees for us. He also said in the 23 September 2022 AMA, that the 1.2% burn tax could work if all the exchanges agree to implement it at the same time.

I have taken CZ’s feedback and incorporated it into my plan which is a good and realistic plan to achieve the 1.2% burn tax off-chain. The 6 months I ask is to give sufficient time to negotiate with exchanges. We may succeed earlier. If we don’t succeed, it’s not a major loss as the tax changes can be rolled back. In the meantime we have exempted dapp smart contracts so building will continue and we 15x increased our on-chain funding rate from the tax, so we will have a lot more money for building on-chain.

@ONLY

Conclusion: This proposal does not offer real mechanisms for guaranteed acceptance by exchanges of a tax on all transactions within the exchange, but suggests spending 6 months on empty conversations.
The offer does not guarantee anything, say you are ready to entrust the life of your children or parents to an unknown uncle with a big name, I answer NO, I do not trust CZ.

WRONG. You’ve ignored the incentives and the method of implementation of the plan to suit your agenda. This is an effort to convince exchanges under my plan, not what you prefer which is BLACKLISTING. Which will go absolutely nowhere. The community clearly voted by 98% majority against wallet blacklisting. It’s a bad idea, and will alienate us from exchanges, and will not work.

My plan is far superior to what you propose, which is actually dangerous.

@ONLY

And in order to implement this burning on exchanges, it is necessary to force them to abandon the MEMO label. And attach to each account on the exchange a real address in the lunc blockchain.

Not going to happen.

@wagnerdalcin

I’m not in favor or against anything. I just reckon that burning and minting was the foundation of Terra ecosystem, and if we aim to have a fully descentralizes algo stablecoin, we gonna have to deal with burning and minting again some day.

Tbh, I’m in favour of development and solid plans to recapitalize the ecosystem. Burning alone doesn’t do that. - in contrary, it literally throws money out of the window. Burning without an usecase just puts the label “meme” over LUNC

Empty talk WAGNER. You support minting, and want it revisted. I hate minting, so I will always oppose it. Your critique is also empty, as my plan does not stop utility on-chain, with the dapp smart contract exemption and a 15x increase in on-chain funding from the tax. My plan doesn’t stop utility, it helps it. Plus it also lets us burn more and push for off-chain burns. You don’t even understand the proposal.

@Fatality

All those who were and are against the plan of Jesus are either stupid or are working against lunc. There is no utility and the price is at the bottom so please stop resisting, we have wasted many months and on behalf of the rest of the patient idiots investing over Burn I DEMAND a tax!!!

I have seen and witnessed what you experienced, I was very upset when the 1.2% burn tax was removed. We were robbed as I detail in this Twitter post: https://twitter.com/ForTheCross_CH/status/1648355323131105280.

@Fatality

Jesus, there are incentives for the Cex in your plan, but you don’t lead by example. You have 2.4% voting power and a 5% validator fee. I don’t see you in the top 25 smoking luncs. Start burning 1% of your earnings every day or at least 0.5% and you will gain credibility and more voice. For encouragement, I promise that when I see 2 days in a row of burns signed by you, I will redeploy 100 million luncs to you. At this point, I urge all believers that Burn can make a difference to the same.

I disagree with you, and I’ll explain why. Firstly, given the LUNC price, my enterprise level validator runs at a more than several hundred USD loss per month, so I am losing money. Next, the Lord led me to do competitions, not burns. I have made numerous competitions putting up my own LUNC to raise awareness for my Vision Plan. My focus is to pass my plan, which is the best tax plan which will benefit all. The purpose of my plan is so that everyone contributes by the 1.5% on-chain tax, and everyone contributes by the 1.2% burn tax on exchanges to burn the supply. This is the best and most effective tax. Relying on people to volunteer burns is not a sound solution to the issue. You can disagree and say I should burn what I can, but I chose to put my resources towards promoting my plan and efforts into that. My plan will be up for vote in June, and the community will make their choice. Regards.