Well i’m sorry but you didnt dig enough…
When exactly? Before may 10th or before may 9th? or before may 11th? I first bought LUNA on 05/11/2022. Prior to this date I had no LUNA. All my LUNA is locked on binance. What will I get?
1 Like
It is round zero for everyone because it keeps adding trillions. Once exponential dilution has kicked, where everyone bought at just stopped being relevant.
Well said. I bought the dip significantly and have a large holding. I’m not opposed to a whale tax where large percentages of whale transactions get burned. I think this is the most appropriate solution for the inflationary bubble on LUNA. At the same time though. We average our position down several times in the hopes of recuperating losses. I wouldn’t want the whale tax to tax us to oblivion if we have no intention of selling.
2 Likes
Equal is equal, without exeption.
2 Likes
Todos los inversores son iguales, antes o después, que se distinga entre los depeg y los post depeg me parece hasta ilegal proponerlo, si compraste a 100 y luego recompraste a 0.0001 es lo mismo, de eso trata la industria bursátil y crypto
All investors are EQUAL distinguishing between pre-depeg investors and post-depeg investors seems even illegal to propose it, if you bought at 100 and then bought back at 0.0001 it’s the same excersice.
That’s exactly what the stock and crypto industry is all about
3 Likes
It’s better to focus on how to prevent the same attack on the new chain with a more well-funded attacker. If this was caused by an attacker, then the attacker has probably an order of magnitude more funds than prior to the attack due to shorts on LUNA and/or BTC. If this new chain is not resilient and has defenses against another de-pegging event, then the same thing will happen on this new chain. All this talk about distributing the new LUNA 2.0 is pointless because it will spiral to 0 again if nothing changes about the algorithm or no new defenses are put in place.
Agreed!
Isn’t this false? Luna holders have lost 99,999999999% of their portfolio, UST holders have lost, at the time of this writing, about 85%, which will also decrease as the new revival plan will put upward pressure on UST for people to get in cheap for the distribution of the new token. Thus, Luna holders deserve more compensation.
And regarding pre/post-peg holders, you can’t possibly expect Terra to value people who last second bought some luna for cheap as it was going down, in the hope if it mooning again later on, with people who have been holding Luna for over a year, and have been through all its ups and downs.
THIS is how to treat a community. Fair. No matter how much money one invested. Everyone should be treated equally. Just because someone loses 40% of his 100 mil does not mean it’s worse than someone losing 40% of his 100$
3 Likes
think of token as you think of stock in the stock market. you can not prefer investor A over investor B just because he was holding the stock longer (or even bought years ago for cents or got for free as an airdrop). no court will allow it. also, think about someone whose checkbook has been stolen, and the scammer used those checks to buy goods and services. the law in many countries already found that the provider of those goods and services should not be a second victim just because he sold his goods and services and received stolen checks. same thing here. if you can find a fair way to reverse minting and burn stolen tokens it’s fine, but you can not punish the public that uses his best fund to buy Luna. there was no sticker on which Luna token was kosher and which one was minting stolen. the only way to do stuff are those that do not involve discrimination, there is no room and frankly, there is no even a safe legal path to prefer any investor over others or staking holder over CEX holders. The public can’t keep paying the bills, just because a small group of people makes mistakes!!!
10 Likes
LUNA and UST are not equal, their rates of risk and reward of each one are distinct:
UST has no rewards because it trades it for more secure peg. LUNA, just the opposite, rewards in exchange of greater volatility risks.
Most of the value was attracted mostly for the stablecoin usecase. Most of the value of the project is still made up by the savings and users of the stablecoin.
It is not a coincidence that depositants are considered before shareholders at bank defaults. It is fairest, but also the best, if not the only, way to maximize the value.
Everybody may be equal, but in capability of voting the final proposal that saves Terra. Which, regarding the numbers, it would likely mean UST depositants would ultimately decide as being the largest mass of users. Maybe this is the ultimate reason why democracy is what survives: Because they are the one that wisely choose to prioritize the peg first and, thus, it is able to restore their systems when this happens.
Take a look at https://classic-agora.terra.money/t/terra-v2-upgrade/
cc @dokwon
Totally agreed
Totally agreed
Actually coming to think of it in a logical way. 1 token is 1 token, what compensation are we talking about, the fork should just give back what one have at 1 token LUNA to 1 token New LUNA.
Price is determined by the market force, at current price, you cannot simply centralised control the price, jack it up put a price tag, and call it decentralised.
Then same people bought 1 token at $0.00001 is taking same risk as those bought 1 token at $100 don’t you guys get it???
DoKwon, again your proposal suck big time!
4 Likes
are u stupid?
some group before UST depeg that hold a big piece of luna and ust has made this depeg. and now u want to encourage them? those people earned billions on crash and ur proposal is to give them a benefit? rly braindead
2 Likes
The point is that it is impossible to distinguish between pre and post attack buyers.
If you woke up to find the price at $40 and sold then decided to buy back at $10 which group are you in?
1 Like
And it starts again… Someone is more equal, or want to decide who can be equal with him… It can’t be done this way! Equal without a “but” or not equal at all…
1 Like
an algorithmic stable coin by its nature can’t keep the peg 100% and those that buy the deep actually in many times keep the faith in the system and help it to bouns back. so are you saying that whoever bought Luna when the UST was 0.9999 should not be counted? or maybe 0.9998 ? or 0.89999 where is the line cross? and who going to play God to decide?
We are willing to forgive some but not reset back and not arbitrary sizes proposed purely by LUNA holders. For arbitrary you can recover it from TFL for a broken system.
Everyone knew what the algorithm does, but the repeg didn’t work right even after dilution. There could be a lag between market forces reacting to the dilution and since the price oracle checks once a minute it could not have reacted very quickly to these changes. Let’s not speculate. The TFL team has the responsibility and action item to perform the analysis and provide everyone the results. Otherwise if nothing looks good then UST holders will want to dilute the rest of the LUNA to recover any remaining value as per the algorithm as a contract.
We can work out different terms however, for example put everyone on the UST side into higher interest bearing securities so that in time UST can be recovered. As long as everything pegs to a reserve it may work to avoid further dilutions. What has already been diluted should not be undone without UST holder accepting that.