Joint L1 Task Force

[ArrayedAster]

Hi Ed,

Proposal looks really good. Thanks to you and all other devs in the proposal whom have elected to contribute further work on LUNC.

I have two points of feedback:

• Regarding the part time assistant and 2.5K per month: Is just one part time assistant enough? Additionally the 2.5K USD may not be enough. Rationale: the job scope seems pretty wide and a lot of work. Public facing work involving social media platforms and crypto is intense, in terms of number of requests and toxicity. It’s very different from eg a discord server for a local archery club. Public facing work can be thankless and a lot more work than people think, in addition to all the internal commitments listed.

• Regarding developer compensation: It may be good to introduce longer term incentives for developers via token vesting, for all developers working on this proposal and particularly promising junior devs to secure mutual commitment. See below quote from Charles Hoskinson from the book ‘Cardano for the Masses’ for some interesting context:

"I don’t imagine Vitalik has a super high opinion of me, and it is what it is. The reality is that we have very big philosophical disagreements about how things ought to be run. When I was there, I said, ‘look if we are taking other people’s money, we have to put that money into a structure that creates accountability. Furthermore we have to put golden handcuffs on the founders and keep them loyal to the project, because there’s too many of them. There are eight founders and if they’re not locked into something, then what’s going to happen is they’re all going to run away and create their own ventures.’

Which is what they did, Anthony (Di Iorio) did ‘Decentral’, Gavin (Wood) did PolkaDot and Parity, I did Cardano. Seven of the eight are gone, and furthermore the incentives were set up that we got paid up front, with a founder reward, which I didn’t take, the other seven did… basically if the projects successful, hallelujah, if it fails, hallelujah… but you’ve already got your maximum reward up front, whereas in an equity finance model, you have to build value over time, and you have a venture capital arm keeping you accountable."

For example a portion of vested tokens could be distributed at fixed intervals over eg two years, or be based on milestones or innovation achievements. However the challenge is administering such an arrangement.

Similar to your prior suggestion in another post, the community could authorize release of vested tokens in conjunction with the oversight committee upon milestones reached. Or, formal employment contracts could be drafted to manage it. Personally I would like to see trusted devs compensated nicely with vested tokens to yield greater value for LUNC BC. I have no idea on appropriate figures, but I think senior devs like yourself and Tobias are easily worth over 500M LUNC with a 2 year vesting schedule. If the community pays peanuts, we get monkeys!

Thanks again for all your great work.

[vishwavasu]

coundnt upload xl. There seems to be restrictions. Hence

[Dannavan_Morrison]

Let’s not get too sentimental. @ek826 @Zaradar et al will have a private organization just like TR. We have passed the days of “TRUST ME”. Again, I have no reason to question the integrity of these individuals but I would rather err on the side of caution. No organization whether it’s Ed’s L1 team or not must be above board.This is business.

[Mpowski]

Can I ask for clarification on this. If prop 11111 passes (which is likely), it would set the Community Pool share of the burn tax to 10%.

I might be reading this point wrong - what exactly do you propse here? Or does it mean you will wire HALF of the burn tax to the Community Pool regardless of what the rewards paramater is?

Id appreciate an explainer as this is currently an important topic.

[madeh]

Thanks for asking a great question. But why can’t we be an ecosystem for startups and experimental startups and Defi at the same time?

[Johnson_B]

Outsider step out !!

[Schultz]

Fully support this proposal. Is it possible to have a liquid staking feature if you pay let’s say a 5 percent burn tax 50 percent to the burn address and 50 percent to recapitalize the oracle pool?

[A_S]

They are a dev team with paid contract only
They aren’t trying to take over anything
Terra will always be owned by the community

[Bit_Commando]

LUNC will finally have full time devs. Bullish.

[VinS]

Hallo, community do not want to merge !Stop with this nonsense ones for ever !

[Rbb786]

What’s your reason… because you think your coin will devalue

A merge doesn’t mean your coin gets merged

In the real world we have many currencies to buy products from a store

We need to figure out the weighted ratio for governance purpose on a merged chain.

Unless you have deep pockets to fund a blockchain I suggest you wake up and smell the coffee

Your community pool is about to dry out

If Binance pull the plug on Burns no one is going to come and save you to top up the community pool

At best you have 2 years of Validators rewards

So you have 2 years to figure out what your coin is worth…

[Gurkan_Okay]

Everyone has the word of a decentralized community, but these are the managers and developers. But no one accepts that the development of the blockchain is needed and money is needed for it, and the number of software developers in blockchain development is less than 1% of the investors, but they have more say. In fact, it is not possible to be a software developer if there is no investor. Therefore, everyone must first find formulas that will protect the investor and then offer suggestions so that they do not withdraw their money for a long time. If there is an agreement on this issue, the formula for the money needed to build will be solved.
In addition, the reason why this project is in this state right now is because of the managers at the beginning. Please protect and respect investors, they are people who trust the Blockchain that finances you. Strive to share with them, not to earn the most money on them, and explain the proposals and developments in a language they can understand or assign someone to do so.

[VinS]

Those dev,s are rebels from Terra Rebels !They could do the same thing inside the group but they didn’t.Reason i don’t know and in moment is less important !What important is we as community should pay them for work that has to be done yet !What if we get another rebels now from this group and work as promise could not be finish ???

[Rbb786]

@ek826 is putting his name to this. Some of the other developers I can’t vouch for… but Ed is a man of his word… Others might come and go… but I see a grown up mature man in Ed who has taken on a commitment to do good for the Terra Classic community.

So whilst @ek826 plays some role, I see there being hope. If Ed walks away then we’re all F! because I wouldn’t trust anyone else to have compassion and empathy to know right from wrong.

TR is an abandoned ship and some of the people who set up that ship have set up L1 task force.

Let’s hope they take their responsibilities seriously

I’m with @Dannavan_Morrison there should be a contract between the community and the developers

If they don’t deliver there should be clauses within clawbacks to return funds to the community pool…

So we have a chance if all goes pear shaped

[VinS]

Sorry >Bro trust me < doesn’t work as we seen in recent past !I do not have anything against paying to devs but why not wen job is done !

[VinS]

Do Kwon is men behind Luna !Men who is charge with criminal record in S.Korea !What less we are close to him and his daughter Luna is better for community !Lunc is more than good without D.K.

[Rbb786]

He is still a free man and so far no one has been prosecuted.

Only time will tell if he’s guilty or just an arrogant entrepreneur who got carried away in his own BS.

Alameda and SBF played a big role in the Terra collapse

The algorithm was flawed and SBF prayed on that vulnerability

Don’t forget SBF backed Solana a competitor to Terra

So there were many reasons to take down Terra

DK has sociopathic tendencies for sure laughing at organisations failing isn’t a normal reaction…

But there is also a genius with vision

The Terra projects are very much driven by its community rather than DK himself

[arunadaybasu]

@ek826 TBH what the community wants currently is a long-term vision and roadmap for Terra Luna Classic. The roadmap was being maintained by Terra Rebels till now, but that is in an unknown state for the time being. The maintenance work that you are proposing to do can be done irrespective of all other activities on the chain.

Even if you had finished the work outlined in the proposal and requested release of funds from CP, it would have been approved. I do not think there is any roadblock to that, or there has ever been. This debate is thus moot.

I have some additional comments which might be food for thought in your free time:

1. Blockchain Roadmap - Since you have a very good idea about how application-specific blockchains should work, you would be able to best suggest to us what the future of the blockchain should be on a technical level. We would like to implore you to work on such a roadmap, maybe with the recommendations of the oversight committee

2. Revitalization of USTC - Although I am not personally involved in the revitalization project, it was brought to our notice that Zaradar was working on an idea which deals with the problem. We would like to request you to work on a possible revitalization of USTC and if possible, revive the plan Zaradar was working on

3. CW721 Contracts - The NFT market is lucrative for boosting volume on the chain. More development is required on the NFT front since other chains are improving their standards and functionality, while Cosmos is still lacking in some basic features that makes developing basic NFT candy machines on Terra Luna Classic difficult and cumbersome. The entire NFT community would be happy if this also included as part of future development plans

[ek826]

re: Online handle - they will have an online handle that can be identified, (definitely via github), so one can see their contributions. payouts are already with held for 4 weeks for the entire team (distribution, end of month, milestones must be hit, oversight committee must approve)
@Rbb786 @Dannavan_Morrison e: Contract - we are using the governance set in place on the chain. The idea of some sort of legal binding entity representing the blockchain that can enforce contracts is a much larger question that is being discussed elsewhere. We would abide by whatever the community governance decides and if a new methodology of process is put in place.
re: Additional community liaison - I’m not opposed to additional liaisons, i think the admin can liaise to any number of “press”
@ArrayedAster re:assistant, yes it is probably not enough, but for the time being given the budget restrictions, i believe we can operate successfully. If the task force continues past the next 3 months, we will have a better idea of this role and what it might cost moving forward.
Re: long term incentives, this is a great idea.
@Mpowski re:antehandler, there will be more information about this coming shortly and there will be dedicated time for discussion. this will ultimately have to go through a separate governance proposal as well.
@arunadaybasu Re: roadmap,Ustc, NFT - Thank you. I think there are brilliant minds in this community that are indeed thinking and working towards these initiatives.

[Mpowski]

Thanks Ed, looking forward to it. It needs to be explained more, i dont even know what the word antehandler means. I hope its obvious that the CP share should still be controllable by governance and follow any value we have in place at the moment.