LUNC & USTC Rebuild Road Map Proposal

Governance & Proposals
47

Well, you answered it yourself… 1 USD always has 1 USD face value and that’s what a Stablecoin is supposed to deliver. People don’t buy Stablecoins for beating inflation.

Using crypto as collateral is a proposition that may serve well during bull markets but in a bear market crypto can lose its value by 90% of more… people will not HODL their Stablecoins and wait for the next bull market or a pump… they want $1 for their $1 at any given time…

I want to know how do you plan to achieve $1 peg when every crypto collateral held as reserve drops 90%?

That’s exactly why I feel UST was a P O N ZI / S C A M because they launched it in a bull market and crashed at the slightest hint of a bear market.

2 Likes
48

Not much more of a safer bet?

Whole point of UST is to be a stable coin and to maintain the peg so it is a MUCH safer bet.

Otherwise you risk depegging, especially in bear markets.

If you enter a bear market, like the one we’re in, a big crash in BTC or ETH can cause a major depegging event and an attack would be fairly easy to pull. A 3-4 X drop in reserve would end it. So most of the collateral has to be actual USD reserves or equivalent like treasuries or a very solid stablecoin.

3 Likes
49

And also those reserve held in LFG belongs to luna classic holder

50

I disagree. I think by rebuilding it, enhancing it, and adding layers of security will help set it apart from the others. Nothing wrong with learning from your mistakes as long as you do not repeat them. Tether is not without It’s own checkered history yet it’s currently the leading stablecoin.

I understand this mistake cost many small investors their savings and I am not making light of that. It’s for that very reason we need to fix this to not only help them make back some (or all) of their money, but prevent this from ever happening again.

This WAS unacceptable and was avoidable had the LUNA team reacted quicker and did not make those costly mistakes, like loosing billions of BTC for no return.

2 Likes
51

I didnt see any prove of selling the BTC reserves… i dont believe them. They need to provide transaction details…

2 Likes
52

They did sell some BTC but it was pointless… during depeg you need to be fast and allocate all your assets close to the peg because the longer it takes to restore peg more chances of bank run…

They had to go all in and not inject funds to push price from 60 cents to 80 cents… it’s game over.

1 Like
53

I do understand your points and not dismissing them as legitimate concerns as they most certainly are.

  1. Were in a bear marlet now so by rebuilding it in a bear market and repegging in this bear market is beneficial to it’s long-term existence as UST is padded at the lows so to speak.

  2. Technically you’re as right as you’re wrong. Yes it has $1 USD printed on it and in america that’s what it’s worth. BUT that does not mean it’s worth $1.00 in the real world. For example, when you have to pay $1.25 USD to import $1 value of goods that really means it’s not $1. This also drives up the price of goods costing Americans more which means they also get less for that $1. This is where we are now in the real world. Inflation is destroying life savings and affecting not only goods and services but affecting markets including the crypto market. Basically Tether is worth less than $1 compared to this time last year so technically it’s depegged. We just don’t see it as a dollar is a dollar right.

The whole premise that everything in crypto is based on fiat, and specifically USD is what is causing this bear market crash. The inflation crippling the world which is about to push us into a deep recession is causing this.

It’s not just about UST, it’s about the entire market. There needs to be a removal of dependancy on fiat valued assets. While we need it to buy crypto and there will always be some correlation between the 2 until there isn’t.

I’m not saying it will be easy, and in the end, if its not working I WOULD go to some kind of fiat based backing or combination thereof. Its worth trying but not at the cost of the community. Unlike Do Kwon I am humble enough to admit it’s not working.

With regards to your question the mechanism for ensuring pegging is there. That wasn’t the issue, it was how it was used and well not used, as well as a lack of saftey protocols.

When the UST was attacked knocking it off its peg, the system should have been paused (or at least throttled), to prevent dillution on both sides. This would have given the team time to restabilize the ecosystem and if necessary get some financial infusion. This is where we need a strong relationship with people like CZ, etc.

2 Likes
54

I agree and have been saying this. How does the value of nearly $3 billion evaporate like that. What about all that miney terraLabs was racking in from profits from LUNA <> UST transactions? I heard it was over $100 million per month???

1 Like
55

Again, stable coin users don’t buy Stablecoins to beat inflation… they want their “face value” $1 at any given time.

Secondly, let me get into more depth. Let’s say you have 1 billion luna and your UST is backed by it, that reserve of LUNA is only valid if only YOU hold all the LUNA… because the market cap will be a false indication of UST backing if that LUNA is traded.

Example: If I sell my LUNA and cash out, that money is gone and did not back UST in any way… however the market cap of LUNA was falsey assumed to back UST.

2 Likes
56

Luna doesn’t need a Leader but a working governance meaning that everyone should be allowed voting.
Luna is a “decentralized” community and does not need a leader

3 Likes
57

Amen!

1 Like
58

That dependency on USD is what is causing this bear market.

We need to build a fully decentralized system not dependent on fiat to help prevent this in the future.

A decentralized stablecoin based on blockchain / crypto assets, is achievable. We were soooo close but there was not enough safety protocols in place, as well as the team further destroyed the ecosystem by making bad decision after bad decision causing severe dillution and causing billions in BTC to evaporate.

It was a combination of a global financial crisis, bad actors and bad management.

59

You have my support!

60

This guy doesn’t get it at all and it’s worrisome. It’s supposed to be a USD pegged stable coin for a reason. You can’t peg it with crypto, especially in bear markets. It will fail spectacularly and I’m not interested in joining another experiment doomed to fail. Having Luna supporting the peg to some extent is risky enough. Adding extra crypto reserves to that is completely reckless.

I already dislike his leadership bid as it won’t take us where we need to go.

His name suggestions are also moronic - Luna Dark? GTFO. This guy is completely disconnected from reality, probably stuck in some heavy metals fantasy.

2 Likes
61

I agree UST should not be backed up LUNA. LUNA can be an asset it holds but should not be core in any means. You are correct to say that would be a false value by limiting these to pairs.

My plan is to use other more stable non fiat currency. This includes BTC, BNB, ETH, and even stablecoins like Tether. Even though Tether is fiat backed, as well as other blockchain assets including NFT’s, Metaverse related assets etc…

62

Great. But don’t fall for Do Kwon’s narrative of calling the original one “Classic”. The original chain IS LUNA, we need to keep the IP on Luna and the CEX listings of the current Luna. Whatever Dookwon wants to call his fork, luna2 or whatever… do not matter.

2 Likes
63

I disagree about no leadership and this forum proves why that won’t work as everyone has differentiating ideas on what to do. There is no commons goals, and its become a mish mash of what ifs. Also look at the history of community coins with no leadership and see how well they have succeeded. The best performing one that comes to mind is Etherium Classic.

You think LUNA will be more valuable than ETC? It took them 6 years to reach a merketcap of $2.8 Billion. Thats 10 percent of Terras ecosystem before the attack. To put that into perspective if you combine UST & LUNA’s current marketcap you get $1.6 Billion which is $1.2 billion away from ETC already. Once the fork happens and if we allow LUNA’s abandonment to become another community oin it will drop not rise.

Just look at other coinss. Look up NYC, this is a good example of a community coin with no leadership. Slowly running down to 0.

Without leadership

  • Who will fix the current problems?
  • Who will set up a coin burn? Please don’t say community burn. That’s how you negate any value of a burn.
  • Who will maintain the ecosystem?
  • Who will keep everything secure?
  • Who will hold the keys allowing for any changes to the code?
  • Lets say we do get programers to help, and access, who pays them and how.
  • Who talks to the CEX’s to convince them to continue listing LUNA? Do you think CZ will discuss anything with a community run coun?
  • expect zero invesment, financing
  • expect zero dapps
  • expect zero value.

Leadership team does NOT mean non community run coins. It means the leader does what a leader does. Does all the things that make the ecosystem not only remain stable, but grow and help earn a return on the communities investment, keep it secure and make the ecosystem something people WANT to invest in.

Votes is what makes the community. LUNA is a governance token, and everyone, NOT JUST validators should have a vote imo. While this is not currently possible and there are some temporary reasons why it won’t be, once Do Kwon does his rugfork (stole this one lol), going forward thats how it should be.

3 Likes
64

You are either extremely dumb to suggest backing a stable coin with NFTs and “other blockchain” assets or simply a crook looking to use project reserves to buy projects where you and friends have an allocation or perhaps a way for you to enrich yourself and pay the team from price appreciation while in a bull market.

Best case you’re a complete fool, worse case a crook.

1 Like
65

LUNA needs a leader who is willing to inject capital. With no new capital, LUNA 2 is DOA.
I truly believe that anyone willing to save LUNA would be the most beloved group/ person in the crypto community. They could profit off that alone but also, they should get a healthy allocation of new LUNA v2 tokens.
As I’ve said in other threads, I will buy and lock half of what I’ve lost in UST of any token, stock for five years from the new leadership. If it was CZ Binance, you don’t think BNB could flip Ethereum if people were forced to buy and lock $5 billion worth of BNB?

1 Like
66

UST was never a USD backed stablecoin, it WAS pegged with crypto. The choice to use LUNA for swaping, validating, and backing up UST was a bad system destinedto fail. It should have been used as the first 2, but not the third as this was the triggering combination. UST should have been backed with higher valued assets outside of it’s own ecosystem. LUNA can be one of the many assets But not a core asset. I know that they had a stash of BTC which they were negligent in handling and lost it all. The taps should have just been turned off, then work on stabilizing, not giving away our BTC.

Not sure where you want to go? I want LUNA & UST to be successful. That is why I still am an investor in it. I am always open to new idea’s on how this can and will happen. I’m not stuck on one or the other.

If UST went to fiat based backing, it will not stand a chance competing against other fiat only based stablecoins and especially now after all that happened. There’s just too much competition.

However if you back it up with crypto assets (now during a bear market), and those assets grow there is potential to not only compete against but surpass them even.

I understand crypto backed stablecoins won’t be for everyone. There are some that won’t put money into UST because of this…But there are also those that will invest because of this.

Decentralized stablecoins will be the future and the benifits of being at the forfront are unmatched.

It wasn’t the crypto bear market or collapse that destroyed LUNA & UST. It was the system. It was the algorythmic system, that did us in. UST should not have been allowed to print trillions of LUNA. This collapse sent a ripple effect throughout the markets causing a more sharp drop, which further exasperated LUNA & UST’s situation, and so on, and so on…

That said eitherway UST will make LUNA more valuable regardless if UST is fiat backed or crypto backed.

This attack can never be allowed to ever happen again. Systems need to be put in place to prevent dillution of either coin.

Also Tether while backed up by fiat, is not immune to depegging, and itself has a controversial history that almost caused it’s collapse years ago.

Are you aware that over the last week there WAS a run on Tether that resulted in over a $7 Billion loss in value. This briefly caused it to drop as low as $0.95 which it did recovour. The question is if there was a larger run what would happen to Tether?

Do you believe Tether is backed 1:1 with fiat?

" Previously, Tether claimed all its tokens were backed 1-to-1 by dollars stored in a bank. However, after a [settlement] with the New York attorney general, the company revealed it relied on a range of other assets — including commercial paper, a form of short-term, unsecured debt issued by companies — to support its token."

Again I ask you what would have happened if there was a larger run on Tether?

That said I still trust Tether, so much so that I literally mentioned it as one of the assets backing up UST.

Its called risk aversion. ALL the assets I mentioned are less risky and I chose them for a reason. Also unsecured debt issued by companies like Binance, Coinbase etc was also mentioned.