Right now there are several other chains offering our brightest devs and dApps a way out, Near and Polygon both trying to take advantage of the situation and both Juno and Secret are offering new homes to some of our best dApps and builders. For us to keep together we need a good solution and incentive for builders to stay going forward. Both Do Kwan and Pedro_Explore came out with proposals on how we should move forward. While I have a tremendous amount of respect for both of them I think their priorities are wrong on this and while they claim they want the ecosystem and builders to be preserved they both advocate
- 400M (40%) to UST holders pro-rata at the time of the new network upgrade. UST holders need to be made whole as much as possible with the reasoning being that “they were promised the most”.
I would argue that at the time of the proposal the buyers of UST were promised nothing and invested based on speculation just as much as the Luna investors did prior to the beginning of the attack. in fact, they might even have made more of a “bet” than any Luna investor ever did, and simply buying UST at the time of proposal would cost you around .1$, and with complete radio silence from TFL & LFG, they were not promised anything. While Luna holders got diluted beyond measure, this proposal would now have anyone who made a bet, or had UST in their wallet at the time of the proposal gain as much of the “new Luna” token as the Luna holders and validators who have been the backbone of the ecosystem for this entire time, who kept buying the dip during the chaos, and paid down their borrows in anchor salvage their Luna positions? I can not see any fairness in people who bought UST below 0.5$ without any reassurances should get an equal compensation as those who were staking, buying, and holding Luna pre the de-pegging event. I also think that the way forward outlined is wrong and that in order for Terra, the L1 to survive there is more required than what is outlined in the proposal.
My Proposal for a real alternative way forward is in 3 steps:
Step 1, Token Allocation: Similar to Dos’ proposal :
Validators should reset the network ownership to 1B tokens, distributed among:
"400m (40%): to Luna holders before the de-pegging event (last $1 tick before the depeg on Binance should be reasonable), bLuna, LunaX and Luna held in contracts should also be recipients, minus the Terraform Labs account at terra1dp0taj85ruc299rkdvzp4z5pfg6z6swaed74e6. The new chain should be community-owned."
however I would have this changed to include: cLuna, y & p Luna & nLuna holders as well. Also, i think it’s only fair that the validators who have kept this shitshow alive should get at least 5% out of this 40%.
400m 40% to UST holders who held UST up until the first pause of the blockchain. Any snapshot afterward is meaningless, at that point there were no promises, only people swing-trading and looking to pump and dump. This 40% distribution should also include any UST in LP positions. Distribution to UST that was locked in lockdrops should be given to the protocols who was holding it at the time of the snapshot, they can then decide to reward their participants either with the Luna, their own tokens, or decide that the users were aware of the risks and have already been compensated for that in protocol tokens.
Since the timeframe is up until the first pause of the blockchain I think there should be at least two separate snapshots taken, 1 at the same time as #1 luna snapshot before the de-pegging event at the last 1$ tick : 30% out of the 40% should go to the users holding UST here. UST that was locked in lockdrop positions should be viewed as belonging to the protocol and thus distributed to that protocol(Reasoning: This was an investment made by the user and at this point the only promise made was that the UST or LP would be given back at the end of the lock-period, no promises that it would be worth anything). 2nd snapshot before the first pause of the blockchain, remaining 10%, however, protocols who enabled locked UST to be unlocked for users to exit, as well as protocols who remained functional throughout everything up until this point(despite the fact that they had no incentive to do so as it was quite damaging to their token-prices) should also be compensated and “made whole” for this and a minimum of 2.5% from this allocation should be given to them. Distributed based on functioning at the time of the snapshot + amount of UST on the protocol, + bonus for unlocking UST when they didn’t have to.
Like you all said it’s the builders who give this chain value.
10% - 100m to Luna STAKERS(not holders and not Luna that was off-chain or on a CEX), LunaX, cLuna, nLuna holders, can easily be done by 3snapshots at the start of the de-pegging event, mid crash, final chain halt. Reasoning: These were the people who tried to help secure the blockchain and push price and not the people looking for 10x swing trades during this crash. Validators who kept running up until the last block and protocols who remained fully operational should share, at a minimum 1% of the total here as they were essential to even have an attempt at salvation(I propose a 50/50 split between them, as validators did earn a fair share of revenue through all the transactions as well).
10% Community fund 100m - Reasonable, should be enough to incentivize new partnerships and help secure the network.
The 40% allocation to UST holders should be subject to change once TFL and the LFG reveal their Bitcoin position as per their own statement there is a possibility of them having lent it out to MMs for UST - meaning they could have around 1B UST from their last loan alone if their announcement of 10b in BTC was accurate
And Yes, I know this distrubution sucks, it’s not going to make anyone completely whole again, it’s going to be worse for some than for others, but it’s going to be that way no matter how you adjust it. I believe that for the community who will stick around, and those that have truly contributed, this is better than the other proposals and gives them more incentive to stay. I also believe that for those who want out, it’s as close to a fair share as you could get. And I say this because this proposal doesn’t benefit me very much either! in fact Do’s or Pedros proposals probably gives more back, but I want the ecosystem to survive, together, and I think in the long term this proposal will be more benefitial and profitable.
We can’t have 1B tokens floating around at re-launch and also, what value does Luna as a token have without UST? This would be like reimbursing users with 1B snowflakes. There would be no buyers, there would be nothing to trade against it as the only real trading pairs on-chain are Luna-UST, as other assets are being bridged out right now, and a bad proposal passing will see other protocols migrate, and you can’t send it to any CEX…
Steo 2, raising capital and not giving up on stablecoins:
We need 2things, We need block production to have on-chain activity. We also need trading pairs and liquidity.
My proposal(open to suggestions or additional inputs):
At relaunch, we need to have a vesting schedule mapped out. I also don’t think we should drop UST. We can rename it, call it v2 or whatever, and make adjustments to the functionality(this of course means that any "old UST on Terra or other chains should be worthless). Despite this death spiral, there is no denying that it was not far away from succeeding, at this point we as a community must put our emotions away and function like algorithms ourselves, take in all data, analyze what went wrong and how can we fix it, and then continue to look for weaknesses that could be exploited and constantly be adaptable.
First: we need to raise capital, we make UST collateralized at the beginning and as we move forward we switch more to a pseudo-algo stablecoin(Frax-ish).
For this to work my thoughts are, that UST(or whatever we name it) is collateralized by two multisigs and on top of that we keep the seignorage function(but with a twist). We set a 1B max supply hardcap on Luna(instead of 7% inflation suggested), and instead of actually burning Luna to mint UST, it goes into the same pool as the thx fees that goes to stakers and is paid out to steakers over time. Yes, it won’t be deflationary in the same way, but it won’t be inflationary either.
Where do the multisigs come into play? well, at relaunch we want UST to be collateralized, so we set up two multisigs, one with volatile assets(other cryptos) and one with a batch of other stable coins. We stake a portion of the tokens(or use another strategy and sell it to accumulate more stables)
We have some options to raise capital: the cosmos ecosystem has been extremely welcoming, Secret-chain and Juno in particular. The question is how to get their participation without having our dApps and teams moving over to their chain. Both chains have discussions on grants and fundings for us in their forums right now, however, we would need to be able to negotiate conditions that would see us remain on Terra. We could do it by offering them vesting tokens from our community pool, almost like OHM bonds or we could offer them tokens right away. We could actually be welcoming everyone in the cosmos ecosystem to participate, own a piece of the Terra Luna ecosystem, or maybe just help us start up, as we’ve already seen they are extremely interested in the protocols built on Terra! And not only that, we actually have Evmos in the Cosmos ecosystem now, as a new chain them or one of their dApps might also be interested in a partnership. With Astroport as an apex dex and the interoperability of Mars, it’s could enable them even more interoperability, not only with each other but with Solana and Near as well(both built on Rust).
We can also raise funds ourselves! Everyone could contribute, and in this proposal, a portion of the Luna goes to the protocols! meaning that the dApps may want to incentivize other chains and projects to invest by, not giving them Luna, but instead giving them their own governance tokens, as the protocols also holds governance power over the Terra ecosystem now(JUST AN EX: Mars could have Secret, Juno and Osmosis invest by having the two lockdrops similar to the one they had on launch, phase one: Lock stablecoin/alt Prism forge style buy with stablecoins, step two: lock up your Secret, Juno, Osmosis, which leads us to:
Step 3 vesting and functionality:
We can’t have 900m Luna being airdropped at relaunch… like i said, we don’t even have a trading pair, and we have nothing to measure it’s value.
So once we decide on a path, if we choose to do this, we start by setting up stable-pools on Astroport, we agree on a vesting schedule for Luna, and my most important piece of part 3: We add Luna- other currencies, and UST-other currencies! What was really cool about Terra was the fact that our staking rewards were paid out in all of these different stables as well as Luna. We even had a protocol named vertex that were working on FX-style trading with these other currency stables, and we would prob need them to cooperate in arranging theese pools, protocols like white whale would have an even bigger task than before to run their arb-bots to keep the pegs, however, it should make UST-peg more resiliant, we could also have the same Luna-UST seignorage on UST- “other currencies” implemented. We really should have more of the other stable currencies circulating this time, and in this proposal I suggest that they make up at least 15-20% of our staking rewards(this should be able to do even if we don’t have enough of them in swap fees, by back-end burning UST for the others before distribution).
I think in the long run this is what would be the best approach… It won’t ever be the same scale as it was a week ago, and it will take time to grow, but this is something that we as a community could do and prosper from by sticking together!
As for vesting schedule suggested: 10% at launch + 10% for the community pool. With the additional option of “unlocking” vesting Luna by a similar function that retrograde was proposing - Lock in 10$ “stablecoin” get 5$Luna-UST LP thats linearly unlocking for xMonths + 5$Luna. Limit: Not more UST in circulation than we have in our “treasury” - very limited at first where max should be equal to stables in our “treasury”
(Ik this seems like a proposal to become a DAO, but it’s basically the same principal as TFL was trying to use only with other assets, using other stables*(vote on which ones, preferably decentralized)* instead of bitcoin to keep the peg)
I’m not saying that i know best, I admire Do Kwan more than anyone, he has done something amazing here! I personally would stil like to have him and TFL in this with us(but thats another topic for someone else to debate) I just think this could be a good way to move forward TOGETHER and something to build on. otherwise, it looks like most projects that survive will migrate to another chain or just shut down and start over… I think we can rebuild, but for that to happen the builders also need to be compensated(if you think my suggested allocations for teams and validators are too much)