In Terra v1, it is those that stake the native mining coin Luna v1 that have the ability to vote, and therefore to determine the course of the protocol (both by whitepaper [section 3 - last paragraph], documentation [here and here], and by code in the staking system).
Correction: On the last point, it is actually the governance module code in the system, although the vote is predicated upon staking the native mining coin, as mentioned in the whitepaper, which is Luna v1.
I know that most people here are not technical but faddat is writing in English over here. I donât need to explain what heâs written since the L1 team will not reply to this also. Itâs almost like they can see this and not replying to it cause this puts them in a bad position.
At least according to me, this does not look like good work. In fact, @ek826 you were tasked with managing this team. I havenât done a review of their work but it sure seems like someone did. And I have a feeling that if all of us reviewed the work, there would be around 100 problems in it.
I highly recommend reviewing this team once again and removing or replacing useless elements in it.
"The problems with this proposal by the L1 Team so far:
This proposal is not merely about the fact of seeking legal advice for the L1 Team, this is about whether we approve of the lawyers and L1 Teamâs proposed plan of action.
This plan involves setting up a Terra Classic DAO (decentralised autonomous organisation) in the Cayman Islands to give the developers legal protections, but comes with other ramifications which need to be examined carefully.
There is a 20k initial advice fee, followed by a 100k subsequent cost to set-up the DAO, which is to be done by a completely different law firm.
The law firm represents the DAO not the LUNC community.
The DAO is managed by a director who is meant to be impartial, but what assurances does the community have over the long term?
The DAO is actually ran by the committee. This is a group of people who run the DAO, make decisions, enter into agreements on behalf of LUNC, and is the same as the Senate idea proposed earlier, which I do not agree with.
This path centralises power for LUNC into the hands of a committee, taking power away from the community and their voice.
It is the committee who engages the law firm, who instruct their lawyers, and who follow their advice. The community is out of the picture.
There is no mechanism in place to ensure the committee will adhere to community governance.
While I believe legal advice for the L1 Team is a good idea, this proposal by the law firm and supported by the L1 Team has many unintended consequences, and presents major changes to LUNC and its community.
Is the committee elected by the community? Are they subject to governance? How much are they going to be paid? Who will they be? What safeguards do we have that they will not abuse their power over the LUNC community? We do not have the answers to these questions yet.
This proposal centralises LUNC into the hands of the DAO, run by the director and the committee. A clear NO for me at this stage.
@ek826 Thank you for your time Hope we can pass this proposal. So we can start a new journey without having any roadblocks. I wish community can see the light at the end of tunnel. Best of luck to all. Have a great day.
What we need to see before making a decision is a counter-offer for Q2 development WITHOUT the Cayman Tax Haven LTD DAO and choose between those 2 options. I can see things that 120k USD can be spent on in a better way. And this is only the start of Legal spendings have in mind. To maintain this, there WILL be additional budget needed. Not to mention its a matter of time appointed (((directors))) will start asking for a fee. Dao or not, there WILL be someone by name and address figuring in the legal documents that the law will chase if things go south.
There are many people who have suffered from the collapse of LUNC and USTC. Kwon said he would make up for this loss with LUNA 2 air drop and he was not successful. I donât think we have much time and soon we may have to defend ourselves or surrender and give up everything. I donât think he was aware of the danger. Even for us to say we donât need to be represented, weâre a community project when we need to be represented legally, there will be a legal process to prove it, how are you going to try to resolve it? problem. We have to be prepared and we donât realize that the discussion is pointless. This community really needs more education. The real problem; Where can we find the money to cover the cost? They said they can cover the developer costs if needed when Binance stopped the burns, why are we refusing everything to contact binance.
I donât understand what sanctions legalists can apply to us? As a last resort, we will be kicked out of CEX. Most likely, this is waiting for most coins. This will increase volumes on the DEX. Maybe for the better. The goal of the United States is that it is impossible to ban, it is necessary to lead. They seek control. We will find ourselves in the legal field - we will put on a collar with a leash. IMHO
At the end of the day⌠this law firm doesnt give me confidence. Lack of a real office, no phone number listed, avatars instead of pictures, and they want to set up an account in the Cayman Islands. If this doesnt scream shady to people, I dont know what does. If this passes, I will sell the rest of my LUNC (even at a loss) and be done with this.
Thanks to everyone for the lively discussion. To summarize, I think there are a lot of valid reasons why to move forward, and equally valid reasons why not to move forward, including some concerns around centralization and exact roles and procedures. The downstream implications of setting up an offshore foundation could use more clarity as well as how this would benefit the community as a whole, cost benefit, etc. More details are needed to make an informed decision.
The proposal doesnât leave me surprised but the amount of negative comments does! it is absurd to imagine a chain of more than 1B of marketcap without a team of lawyers and advisers. Thereâs a reason why businessmen and celebrities spend thousands of dollars on legal coverage! Guys letâs not forget that we have the SEC who want to discredit the work of many devs. in the last 4 years in terra lunca. This technology is necessary, letâs try to defend it.
To summarize what @RabbiJebediah and others have already said, Horizons Law will not represent the community under this proposal and therefore the community pool should not be used to fund such legal representation.
@ek826 raised valid reasons for seeking legal representation for himself and other American citizens who are developing Terra Classic. However, the community pool exists to fund projects that benefit our community as a whole, not to indemnify a chosen few, regardless of how valuable their contributions may be. I hope @ek826 and other members of the J1LTF privately raise funds for legal representation, but I agree with those who have explained why community pool funds should remain unavailable for this purpose.
Therefore, the community should vote NO on this proposal.
Man, do we sit so comfortably behind the word âcommunityâ knowing we are not in legal jeopardy ourselves just by owning a little to a lot of Lunc. On top of that, we also say a big FâYou to the people who have or will stick their necks (i.e., livelihood, reputation, future) on the line to help revitalize the chain.
So, as long as YOU are not in hand-cuffs itâs all right and itâs also all right for the people who are trying to make you rich to be in hand cuffs. This is not a community then.
A chain at times hovering around a billion dollars in valuation needs legal representation Period.
First of all community pool funds are very limited. Therefore, we should be very careful on how we allocate them.
Second, the quality of work produced by the L1 team in Q1 has been questionable to say the least. Tobias spent a lot of time enjoying himself on twitter, attacking community members, being condescending towards them and generally thinking/working on ideas that we did not pay him to do so. Now Edward Kim has been keeping a low profile which is commendable, however, it turns out he is working on side AI-Chain while being paid from community funds, which is also something we did not ask for.
Why should we even continue to allocate funds to L1 given the low quality of work performed by certain members? Let alone a legal funds that is not appropriate in any way since the Terra Classic network is decentralized, i.e not falling under a single countryâs jurisdiction.
On the other hand, legal advice received could be used by Edward and the team to manipulate the Terra Classic blockchain for their own benefit while ultimately not creating any value for the LUNC community.
This is an easy no with veto.
This proposal is not for legal representation of the âchain,â but rather a yet to be established DAO headquartered in the Cayman Islands. These distinctions matter.
Are you against having a DAO or having it set up in the Cayman Islands more out of reach of US regulations?
As it stands, if I were a developer in the US and knowing the chain has not been organized in a way that affords me some protection, I wouldnât touch it with a ten foot pole.
I think the current approach is better. Keep TGF which is a US based non-profit. They manage funds for the community under trust. If there is legal action by the SEC against the developers then put up a spend prop at that time for legal representation for whoever is targeted. Otherwise you can make a spend prop for targeted legal advice on a particular LUNC issue. I donât support this.
I donât agree with structuring a non-profit in the Cayman Islands, it looks shady, who would trust that or want to donate there? Rather TGF is a legitimate USA non-profit run by a non-anonymous individual. Thatâs way better and more professional for LUNC.
Going and changing the whole structure of LUNC, using 120k and more future funds, just to offer POSSIBLE protection for LUNC developers seems way out of line.
How is this DAO going to stop any enforcement action? What is the legal advice on why this option was chosen? This was not explained. The legal advice and justifications were received but are not being communicated to the community. This is not appropriate. Why a DAO in Cayman Islands? Why is this even necessary? What protections will this offer over the current situation?
For LUNC itâs better to be open and up front and deal with any legal action IF IT COMES, rather than hiding in the Cayman Islands.
This is aside from the huge centralisation issues with the DAO run by director and committee.
If this is about setting up off-shore so the Dev team has carte blanche to mess with USTC, then I donât support that either. You mess with USTC and try to make another algorithmic stablecoin there is going to be legal risk period. Itâs not even necessary to touch it, but people have pinned their hopes on it wanting to re-tread the same ground as Do Kwon.
The more time goes on the more I am against this proposal. This is not what I imagined when I heard seeking legal advice.
Iâm not necessarily for or against having an entity setup in the Cayman Islands which by the way is completely legal. I would dare presume most of the rich and famous already have one there or in the Bahamas or British Virgin Islands (many, many places in fact), but simply saying âitâs sketchyâ is not a valid argument. With that said, there can be other alternatives just as good.
Now, if you know you are in a grey area I would very much think having legal consultation, which can be accepted or rejected, can be invaluable to avoid trouble in the first place. Also, please think about the person who can get in trouble - doubt any of you here will except for a few. Itâs very arrogant of us (folks who are not going to get in trouble) to wash away like itâs a simple matter the potential legal trouble of people who actively try to help the chain.
Hope we can pass this proposal. So we can start a new journey without having any roadblocks. I wish community can see the light at the end of tunnel. Best of luck to all. Have a great day.