LUNC being D E L I S T E D, leading to this proposal for a fresh look at vision & business development

Hello all, 4 parts to my post:

  1. Summary
  2. Core points
  3. Next actions
  4. Your reply

FYI the NDAX email specifically refers to “D E L I S T I N G” LUNC but when I tried to upload this post I got an error message saying that word is not permitted in a post. So I have modified the text below with an alternative way of saying it but that issue is what triggered my desire to make this post.


On April 14, 2023 I got an email from one of the exchanges I use, NDAX (many of you may not have heard of it because it serves Canadians so it does not have a large global presence.) They are taking LUNC off their platform due to their perception of how the project has been managed since the implementation of “Terra 2.0” as per the may 25, 2022 approved proposal. My paraphrase of what they said is that the project has not been well managed and has been floundering around to the point where they don’t see it as a quality project any more; enough so that they want it off their exchange. I am personally invested in LUNC with a decent proportion of my portfolio staked in LUNC and also some in LUNA and I would like to see the project(s) succeed. I can not disagree with the points NDAX made in their email (copied below) as I have observed some of the issues they highlighted. In contrast I have observed several other projects that have exciting visions, unified leadership, and a cohesive supportive community, and that is where we need to be. The timing is critical; the crypto market could see strong improvements and capital inflows during the next 12-24 months; it would be nice capture a large amount of that inflow; yet the risk is that we could flounder around more or even decline if the legitimate observations made by NDAX are not addressed.

One last part of this summary: I know that people are easily offended and can take things personally so in no way am I saying anything negative and I’m not addressing this at any one person or group. As a matter of fact, I have not had any interactions with the Terra team so my comments and ideas here are generic and universally applicable to the community. Please don’t take offence. My proposal as itemized below is exclusively my objective insights and attempts to help the Terra project(s) thrive.


Here is a copy-paste of what NDAX sent out in their email, minus the standard paragraphs about their services and legal disclaimers; this is just the part where they speak directly about LUNC:

We are writing to inform you of an important update regarding the “removal” of Luna Classic (LUNC) from our trading platform, effective April 21, 2023, at 11:59 PM EST.

As you may be aware, on May 25, 2022, the Terra community approved a proposal to create a new network called “Terra 2.0” and renamed the previous network “Terra Classic”. Since then, we have observed a concerning trend in the stability and reliability of the Terra Classic network leading to our decision to “remove” LUNC from our trading platform as it no longer meets our listing requirements.

Here are a few reasons for the “removal of LUNC”:

  • Maintenance cost vs. usage
  • Unreliable public node infrastructure
  • Non-central governance leading to sporadic, uncoordinated decision-making regarding upcoming upgrades and changes
  • Inordinately frequent modifications to the fee structure
  • Lack of any technical documentation


  • Timing: The industry is in the early stage of a massive global tidal wave of increasing compliance and somewhat globally coordinated compliance. These compliance officers and law-makers all talk to each other, often travel for shared compliance conferences, and many have a shared bulletin system. Everyone is going to know that LUNC is giving NDAX cause for concern; in other words, NDAX thinks LUNC is a financial and legal risk to carry and they want to get if off their platform in case things go badly. Be assured that one “removal” notice from a platform is closely watched and considered by other platforms. The Terra community can not afford to have LUNC (or LUNA) be perceived as a business risk by the exchanges in this time of rapidly evolving compliance monitoring. A project needs to really have it together or else platforms will want to distance themselves from it. This NDAX “removal” notice is a critical alarm bell.
  • The Canadian financial industry: I have observed regulatory missteps in Canada for sure, but there is no denying how globally watched and followed the Canadian financial system is. Some of you might (painfully) remember 2008 “The Great Recession” and one of the largest stock market and economic declines in history. What you may not know is that in the 12-24 months afterwards nearly every major country around the world send auditors, compliance officers, and law-makers to Canada to see why and how the Canadian financial system is designed and regulated because the Canadian financial institutions suffered the least damage of all the developed countries around the world during that implosion. Canada has a strong background and respected reputation for a compliance regime that prevents organizations from falling apart when disaster strikes. This just puts more power behind the punch when a Canadian crypto exchange “removes” LUNC. It’s cause for concern. You may also be aware that in recent weeks the Canadian regulators released a substantial overhaul of regulations (some of which were likely overkill, but some new rules were very good) and the result is that quite a few exchanges and other crypto related firms have pulled out of Canada, some of which said they would be back after an upgrade to their compliance. No doubt Canadian firms and those who are outside Canada who offer services to Canadian residents have been combing through any and every weakness in their offerings to remove legal liabilities. I don’t think it is a coincidence that these more stringent rules were just announced and shortly afterwards NDAX is giving LUNC the boot from their platform. They see things that give them cause for concern, and that could easily have a domino effect for any other exchanges that want to distance themselves from projects that are not running smoothly.
  • Is this “the canary in the coal mine”? [FYI coal miners would put a canary in the coal mine because they sing constantly and they pass away quickly when toxic fumes are released. So if the miners noticed that the canary was no longer singing, that was their warning that toxic fumes have been released and they need to get the hell out or they themselves will pass away.] So… the NDAX “removal”… is the canary still singing and we’re all fine, or do we need a bit of a shakeup and make some changes stat? If we do little or nothing, or if we delay, perhaps we’ll find out… the hard way. Let’s all step back and look at where the industry is at, big picture style, and in that context assess the weaknesses in TERRA / LUNC / LUNA and create an exciting updated roadmap with cohesive vision across the community. My concern is that if we flounder and retain weaknesses we’ll just be surpassed by other projects and be shown the door by other exchanges. But we have time, if we move quickly. But if we delay of get caught up in infighting that will work against us in painful ways. The clock is ticking, compliance is evolving, and money is moving. We need to tie up loose ends, get the platform solid, and implement an exciting vision for the future with enhancements that are not yet in place.


I don’t work in crypto but I have been actively trading crypto since 2017 and I have been a business consultant for over 20 years. When reading updates from the community and analysis from the financial media I have become more and more concerned about the project. Indeed the bomb went off in 2022 and the community has been in recovery mode since and I’d say has done fairly well in many aspects. However we have not found our groove, and there has been a lot of what I would call disarray. When I look at - ironically - the SHIB project, I must say I am wowed. It started as a joke, literally, but their community leaders are truly visionary; they have created a clear roadmap with highly ambitious project improvements, they have been steadfastly making progress on their actual roadmap and the entire community has a real exciting buzz. They have put some tangible real world usable features into what was just a meme coin, but now it has turned into something with genuine use cases and it’s been well executed (mostly). The Solana community as well is a good example; their existence was called into question in 2022 but now look at the Solana ecosystem; it’s thriving. Geez they even have their own phone now. And their meme coin BONK started to look like a flop but they seem to now be following in the footsteps of SHIB as BonkSwap is launching and has a 22 person team who are just tearing it up and it has a buzz now as well. We need stability of focus, a fresh look at the roadmap with proactive revisions, and to get to work on the weaknesses in the project(s) that have been called out by the credible press sources and any other organization that has importance and credibility, such as NDAX and any other industry organizations from which the community will benefit from if they believe in the project. As far as the existing team and other contributors go, I give them respect for preventing the project from totally biting the dust, which easily could have happened. The collective work saved the project and has given it, and therefore all of us as investors, a fighting chance at recuperating something from our staggering 2022 losses, and to participate in the growth of the project over the long haul. It would make sense to me that the focus has been on recovering from disaster, and here we are still going, so as far as I’m concerned let’s consider it Mission Accomplished. And now we need to move on from “disaster recovery” and to “cleanup and thrive”.


  • Review & update the roadmap. The project needs a distinct identity, a list of tangible use cases, and enhanced and exciting vision. We need to ask ourselves, “What would make the project trusted by exchanges? How can we be proactive with the new global compliance regimes? What would make it appealing to investors? What is a new and exciting addition to the future that will create a buzz that will lead to real-world implementation? How do we get the message out? Of course the team has already done this, but more from a post-disaster perspective. Now that we have survived the 2022 implosion I think it’s time for a re-do looking forward from where we are now.

  • Review how the team is structured. Determine if we need to make changes to the structure, and if we should add distinct sub-teams who specialize in defined aspects of the project, recruit some additional talent, etc.

  • I’d like to point out that a forum member “Daniel_Alpha” started a thread on April 14 called “Lunc Business Group”. I don’t know how much of his ideas are already at work in the project but I was encouraged to see other community members putting forward their ideas to develop the business. An action point is to get the word out from within the community to rustle up more help to implement a host of quality improvement ideas and to kick-start any new components.

  • After we have a revised vision, business plan, roadmap, improvement ideas all in motion, let’s then draft a response letter to NDAX asking to be re-listed. To gain credibility with them and across the crypto-sphere we need to be willing to eat humble pie and get to work on shortfalls.


Please make sure your reply:

  • Is positive only.
  • And contains substance that can add to the ideas and help move them forward.

I believe the TERRA / LUNA / LUNC projects have a great base with the technology, a loyal investor base, and in-the-know team members. We know how the crypto environment is changing and where things are heading with product design and compliance regimes. Let’s make a shiny new kick-ass business plan from the top-down that will revitalize the project(s) to a new level and put forth an offering that is appealing to backers, partners, exchanges, regulators, and users.



This should not be in the governance zone
I have never heard of that exchange until today.

The exchanges that support Lunc are not going to de-list it and those are the ones that really count.

1 Like

Hello Vendrugo, what zone should it be in? After I looked through them it seemed the most logical as it is a ‘proposal’ as per the name of the zone. What would you suggest is the right place for it?

If the platform decides to remove the token, it is their decision and a proposal in the governance will not change that.
We must remain focused on the most important things, the rest will come by itself when the objectives are met

Lol. It’s not a joke. I honestly thought this is some kinda practical joke on us.

They have tweeted it.

It’s literally what you said that they have said. They have tweeted that also :smiling_face_with_tear:

Hahhahhahah hey L1 Team :rofl: where’s TGF, L1JTF, TCV, TR, AllNodes and everyone else now?!

It’s literally written “frequent modifications to the fee structure.”

No no go ahead, make it 1.2% now :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Blame on those who voted YES on 50% seigniorage (and thos whose supported it by saying “screw Binance”)


People still wanna change it and are talking about changing it while I am typing this. This is what the community is doing 24x7 instead of following up with the developers whether they even exist or not.

We are not going to worry about an exchange that has never been heard of. Who wants to be here will be here and who doesn’t have the door open. If they are not going to help or contribute anything, it is better that they go extinct or remain where they are where nobody knows about them.

Instead of looking for solutions they preferred to remove the token

This is generally how employees talk, not business owners.

Which is why you can see TFL and AllNodes running around for a proper public node provider. They consider themselves responsible, and business owners, generally the kind of attitude business owners should have.

This is extremely sensible and an extremely difficult thing to do.

I have tried to list and describe some ideas in this proposal which can vastly improve the value and acceptability of LUNC right now:

You may comment on the proposal discussion above in its thread or leave your comments here.

I have not covered the roadmap and vision in this document, because it is not for me to decide what is the roadmap of the community. The community will decide the roadmap of the community and what they want. For this, an extensive survey has to be conducted among the known and popular members of the community. We have to collate what they need and then create a roadmap. This roadmap will probably be much better and much more acceptable by the community.

TR has created a roadmap on their website and L1JTF has a technical roadmap of what they wanna do for the next 3 months but there is no common roadmap yet. So we need to work on that.

Regarding the vision of LUNC, this is something that people need to go back to the documents to read and understand. It is called Terra-Luna cause just like the Earth and the Moon works in conjunction with each other’s gravity (one would not exist without the other) Terra and Luna work in conjunction with each other through the minting and burning system.

Currently, we are on the Cosmos ecosystem so we have to create a new vision of LUNC which takes into account the vision of the Cosmos ecosystem as well, something that TFL never did since it is a centralised institution and all their assets are licensed from Cosmos.

We are decentralised, and we have to remain true to that idea of a decentralised development environment. So the vision and the roadmap definitely has to be made again after extensive research and survey on the subject.

I am quite sure that if we just made a public roadmap and vision document, that could single-handedly be a significant boost to the reputation of the Terra Luna Classic and it will become much easier for everyone to refer to something to know where we are in the current stage of building. Without this necessary roadmap, teams working on LUNC are working in a highly disconnected manner trying to grab a piece of the same pie :pie:

They will re-list once these issues are solved. No need to be a jerk about this situation whilst LUNC is trying to get back on its legs again.

1 Like

This is what happens when people are too confident.

This graph is most probably because of this topic. They probably sold all and exchanged for something else.

:rofl: :rofl:

So what’s the logic? Twitter logic is:

  1. The WHALES did it
  2. Gary Gensler did it
  3. Bitcoin wasn’t holding resistance

So a whale is moving LUNC cause his Bitcoin got tanked?

Or LUNC is algorithmically pegged to Bitcoin?

This doesn’t make sense cause during the last crash, LUNC didn’t even flinch.

You are forcefully trying to correlate two movements that, possibly, aren’t connected.

Well then, you explain. I am open to all sorts of explanations for this event.