LUNA Go Forward Proposal

This would reward both the attacker (who had stockpiled UST before the attack) and those whole sold during the unpegging event (IE: weak hands). Those are the groups this would specifically be designed to punish. Those with their UST still on hand are the group that needs to be brought into equilibrium with Luna. This would potentially accomplish this.

2 Likes

Yes the proposal is silly, the real question is whether Luna’s leadership is speaking to the right people and doing the right analysis to save the ecosystem

2 Likes

They can exclude the attacker Waller

I do not understand.
I sold UST after you halted the network at huge loss.
If I understand correctly I am not going to get the new Luna?
That is really unsat as a proposal.
At least you should include those that stayed trusting the peg would be gained again.
What a disappointment.

Condolences if you have sold. because selling is no longer trusting the system,

2 Likes

The attack on the Terra-Luna ecosystem has had success because:

*) the big short had an immediate impact on the price;
*) the Team had no physical time to react;
*) the ecosystem had no sufficient internal-structural mechanisms to disincentivize deviance from the 1 USD peg.

Since the 1 USD peg is paramount for UST, I propose three (more) kinds of internal tools, at the blockchain level, to help maintain the peg:

A) artificially disfavor toxic transactions which would tend to depeg UST;
B) artificially slow down the speed of transactions which would tend to depeg UST;
C) internal automatic refill policy which tends to restore the peg.

A) Disfavor toxic transactions - The UST<->LUNA swapping set of current transactions is divided into two queues (each one organized in temporal order):

q1) transactions minting UST;
q2) transactions minting LUNA.

At each instant, the choice between what transaction of the q1) and q2) queue is going to be processed, is made based on a random function of:

i) the value of UST on the market (taken by an oracle);
ii) the volume of the transaction.

If the peg is within an acceptable interval (say 0.995<=UST<=1.005) the probability p is 0.5 for both q1) and q2). All is right.
When the price exits the peg interval (UST<0.995 or UST>1.005), the probability of processing a toxic transaction is decreased with a suitable law, which depends also on the volume of the toxic transaction, with p->0 as an extreme limit. The more toxic the transaction (in term of peg deviance induced and volume), the lower the probability.

B) Slowing down the speed of toxic transactions - When a toxic transaction, chosen by the random mechanism described above, is in any case going to be processed, the various hashing functions of the network are enhanced with some Password-Based Key Derivation Function, such as PBKDF2 or Bcrypt, with a number of iterations which is increasing with the size of the toxic transaction and the deviation from the peg. So, toxic transactions tend to slow down the network, giving more time to the Team to study countermeasures.

C) Automatic refill - The ecosystem has two tanks, one with LUNA and one with UST, that are strategic reserves previously acquired (similar to the BTC reserves recently acquired and used during the bank run). They are automatically used by the protocol when, during an attack with a bank run similar to that occurred, no one wants to launch a transaction that would tend to restore the peg (one of the two queues q1)-q2) is empty). The entity of the refill depends on the deviation from the peg and on the amount of the volume, up to a certain level, accumulated by the toxic transactions queued. For example, if q1) is empty, the protocol automatically launch a refilling transaction, that enter the queue.

Hope that some of these (rough) ideas can help.

12 Likes

congratulations, according to the proposal you have collected the money and you will have your tokens back, I who bought them will be expropriated because the supreme power decided it :man_shrugging:

4 Likes

Some of us bought Luna, and not UST, if Luna was not meant to be bought, why wasn’t the blockchain halted then!

3 Likes

80% of pre-crash holders will sell once they get it back and there will be no new investors. Lets do it :+1:

What about those who bought on CEX without moving anything offchain… just to support the cause of Terra Luna? As you know, liquidity from fiat comes in only through exchanges. So why is not swapping assets onchain or dex’s also considered gambling. There is no easy solution. but everyone who had a stake in this game before the hack and after the halt should be equally rewarded. The culprits who ran away with the hacked money are already gone and they should be dealt offchain by external means. And plow back the booties they made back into the newTerra reserve at later time when the whole situation is resolved through logical means

4 Likes

Wow!! That sounds like a vision to me! :+1: :rocket:

@TerraBuilderAlliance Are you reading this?

the attack was successful because they decided to collateralize with bitcoin, BTC and an asset outside the mechanism so it is obvious that it would have brought instability to the ecosystem

I guess things happened so quickly there was no time to react. The Terra team didn’t communicate properly with the exchanges to make a halt to trading activity straight away. That would have saved a lot of damage.

Binance has halted trading after the fact instead of before. Anything they list and any other exchanges they really have to monitor. Issues with inflation/hyperinflation can happen to any token and cause havoc.

Some exchanges I believe are also offering refunds on the money spent in purchasing. That would be the honourable thing to do for those who bought on the way down and could be paid for through funds in the Luna Foundations etc. But that has its own issues obviously

This type of proposal will probably be lost in the sea of replies. You really should put it on a separate thread or direct it to management.

Exactly, and congratulations if you bought the dip - That is precisely why I am in crypto. And do not tell me you’re not here for that too!

3 Likes

Actually Binance has listed Luna again, and its trading as normal. This is your 2nd chance to back it up. I’m still supporting with all my might.

2 Likes

Me too!

1 Like

Let us get this straight…

  • Before the attack and up to May11th there were about 340 million LUNA in circulation.
  • On May 12th it was 1461 million LUNA in circulation. So you diluted the existing LUNA with a factor 4.3.
  • On May 13th (=today, at the moment of writing) there is 6.500.000 million LUNA in circulation which is a factor of almost 20.000 the initial amount. While the price of UST didn’t go down 20.000 times!

This is insane! It’s extremely unfair to those who bought LUNA before and kept it. Now someone can buy it at a price 20.000 times less than the initial holders.

All the LUNA tokens starting from May 13th should be burnt! Be fair to the initial holders and remove the opportunists.

PLEASE VOTE UP so they can see it!

6 Likes

I lot of people has there UST on CEX. You need to give time to withdrawl UST from CEX. You need to give time to exchange UST Luna2.

1 Like

Do not forget they can burn the unsold supply! Trust the team folks.

3 Likes