proposal it plz. I would definitely vote yes. The only questions are what stakers will earn by staking lunc and how long the staking cycle would be. My basic idea is staking lunc and earning ust.
this is not true. there are many ways to enable lunc staking. of course the most straight forward would be them cooperating. we need to push for that and if that fails, proceed to take over lunc in other ways. but before that, all other discussions to improve lunc is useless. so lets work together on this first
Completely agree, that’s how the system is designed to work, your coin your vote and necessary code changes have been implemented so there is no reason not to re-enable it.
Except that this is ONE of the big proposals that the current Validators fear the most so they will NOT vote for this.
Also how do you propose to preve t any attack like a 51 attack. We know (posted around) that there are about what 10 wallets that hold a very large chunk of the circulating supply.
Staking will not work like it did before, at least not without some serious reconfigurations and modifications. You cannot just turn the switch to on. That will crash the system and destroy LUNC.
What will happen when the circulating supply reaches total supply? Adding trillions into the staki g pool (very realistic) we will hit that faster than you can say crash.
Do you have any idea who these new validators that take over are, what their plans are for governance, and why did they spend all that money buying up LUNC?
I’m more scared of them controlling our chain then the current inactive ones.
I believe that was done no? The USTC circulating supply dropped to 10.25 Billion. I don’t know if ALL of it was burnt but most of it appears to have been. With zero benifit I might add. In fact it’s worth even less now. That was a fund that could have benifited the revival of the current chain, and or pre attack holders of UST.
Well I can tell you it would be a short run. Opening up staking now would see the circulating supply go up even faster and we would hit Total supply pretty fast.
What will happen to staking once we cannot reward any more tokens?
Except they are not. No more than any other chain.
In fact 2 chains with so many similarities in it’s code, but has 2 different communities, would be beneficial to developers. Imagine developing for one chain and getting 2? I think the 2 would benifit from each other in more ways than one can imagine.
Except the current supply is nearly 7 Trillion and we are approaching that hard limit whereas the older version would of had a circulating supply of 100’s of Millions and briefly up to 32 Billion when it was turned off.
I’m still not sure if we know this answer. Of the newly minted 6.5 T LUNC: Was that all sold and dumped on the market? I don’t see how based on the volume.
So that leads me to believe that a significant portion is still held by insiders, TFL, LFG and such. Since they decided to fork and walk away, how can this be burnt if it’s still in those wallets?
A suspicious mind might think they are being quiet to see about letting the little people try and recover LUNC and just continue to sell on the market for a very long time, burn or no burn… But that’s what a suspicious mind would think, not me.
they are not voting for anything else, they are pretty much passive now. this is the only proposal we need for them
what do you mean by this? this is proof of stake. if proof of stake doesn’t work, there are no other proposals that can save this chain. the current validators are the 51% attack. they own 0.001% of lunc but make all the decisions
what will crash the system?
it is for the community to decide. lunc can vote for the validators they want. the current validators are surely not what we want as they are doing nothing.
scared? then there will be no progress and lunc will not live. the longer this stalemate goes, the lower the chance of survival.
I saw one of your proposal is to take over leadership of lunc. I strongly urge you to work with validators to enable lunc, then I would strongly support you, I think many lunc holders will too.
@vixasi7192 Is anyone reviewing this PR at all ?
If not, @TerraBuilderAlliance@AtoZ@rosanne89 any chance to get this PR reviewed pls ? Or could you kindly let us know how we actually move forward and what are the steps required to get it merged.
and just in case some people might still be confused about the current reality we are in. @Deathstar_Daddy
here is a clear definition of 51% attack:
In a decentralized network, a minority group of individuals seized control of the masses through gaming the system.
Enable LUNC staking right now. It is the right thing to do:
LUNC needs to be fully functional. Sorry if Do Kwon doesn’t agree with that, but it would be best for the entire Terra community. Then let developers choose what platform, what chain, they want to build on. The more options the better.
I think the recovery of this project should take place in 3 steps, first a hardfork to cut the supply to 1/10, then implementing a burn mechanism through a fee, and finally giving the project purpose.
