I remain hopeful.
lmao some of the validators registered mails are not even real
Nikola-HydraChain, I love your proposal and we’re on the same page.
My own proposal does actually complement yours, establishing the rate at which Luna should be minted during a downfall: Luna Death Spiral Bugfix Proposal
If both our proposals are implemented by the community, Luna and UST will be saved.
2 Likes
Because I don’t see the will to save UST and LUNA.
without forking
Are we going against those who sold after losing the PEG and want to profit twice…
this is the only correct way to undo this shit, build back and a great adoption topic.
build bottom up with the value it has…
Moment of overcoming, where are men on this EARTH
let’s spread this proposal
2 Likes
@Nikola-HydraChain two things! Again thank you for this great proposal and I hope to do my part keep this thread close to the top.
@Matt21621 from 0rigin.one wanted to connect but didn’t mention you.
Now, the real reason for this post:
It is very possible that @dokwon will not provide the leadership we need. We should have a plan in case through either inaction or action he gets in the way.
Can we propose that the changes to Anchor recommended here (tiered interest rates for paired UST/bLUNA lockdrop) be adopted on Anchor governance? technically those aren’t a matter for the whole Terra chain but a matter for Anchor stakers. I expect staking of LUNA will need to be re-enabled for changes like that to go forward, otherwise paired lockdrop will be very difficult. But restructuring Anchor Protocol is a form of parallel progress that we can make while TFL and the validators sort out what’s going to happen with the whole chain.
@Nikola-HydraChain, would you be comfortable taking some stake in Anchor to push this forward? It should be you who writes the official governance proposal. I think if you lead, we will follow you.
6 Likes
Agreed with raising awareness on this proposal. The other proposal has far more comments, but mostly debates and disagreements. Also, anything Do proposes will likely be met with rage.
They came to kill us. We survived and it will be the come back story of the century.
I knew about the original d-peg event last year before I put my money here. I mistakenly thought the system must have learned something very important in the last depeg and fixed it. I was wrong.
Everyone will need to know that this problem is fixed going forward.
How do we promote this proposal?
2 Likes
I’m not sure bumping this post is going to help when it’s all the validators that need to ultimately vote, no?
I still can’t believe we only have a 1% vote - When literally 99% of the comments on here are in support of it and every other proposal has a 50/50 opposition.
This proposal fixes the problem and allows the ecosystem to be reborn better than before.
How do we promote this to the community in a way that first, provides hope? And second, is a long term fix and lastly, shows the resilience of the whole ecosystem to learn from a coordinated attack.
We were attacked by forces that are threatened by Defi market. NEVER underestimate what the US gov is willing to do to maintain dominance for USD. They are masters at this game and this is the front line battle for all of the Defi space.
Let’s promote this proposal and pass as this is the most logical solution.
We will have a brand issue to deal with going forward. There a story called David and Goliath many of us know that would be effective messaging.
That would be our story to tell and demonizing the bullies that tried to kill us, but didn’t succeed is where we find new brand strength.
Fix the system. Fix the brand. Allow new Luna holders to benefit just like the original investors but at a better price as we speak and wait for repeg that benefits UST holders.
Let’s promote this proposal!
6 Likes
Totally agree. I don’t get it.
2 Likes
Thanks @Kalirren was going to add mention to them as well!
@Nikola-HydraChain @Matt21621 thank you both! Hoping some amazing collaboration can take place!
5 Likes
can’t explain any more than that, best marketing has happened this week for LUNA take advantage
5 Likes
Can we organize a Twitter Spaces Live conversation for this proposal? I’m new to this type of effort. What needs to happen to get support for this. There are too many proposals to go through them all with real detail.
This proposal makes the most sense economically. Let’s promote so everybody knows about this.
5 Likes
Let’s just all agree now, the author needs to take over LUNA 1 when they go off and do their FORK for LUNA 2 and then we can get on with things and show them how it should be done. I am now buying more LUNA on the off chance this is something that comes into people’s heads I have given up on the current leadership.
1 Like
I am open to contributing, regardless of the team format… if the community considers it may be of help of course.
In my opinion, and as described in the thread, Anchor is an invariable part of the step for recovery, and its product must be adapted to provide a more sustainable synergy with Luna.
Perhaps it would be wise to first clarify the community consensus on a plan forward, as I see there are several asynchronous discussions.
Regardless of this, I will check how Anchor’s governance tooling works to see how it can be proposed for discussion there as well.
11 Likes
@Nikola-HydraChain Buonasera, spero lei riesca a dare una risposta seria al dolore creatosi intorno a TFL, la ringrazio per il suo lavoro di qualità.
Vorrei precisare che nel CEX NEXO non è stato mai possibile fare il TOP UP di UST.
In NEXO tutti gli utenti hanno utilizzato lo swap o il buy per avere UST.
Con questa proposta, gli utenti di Nexo possessori di UST, avranno un rimborso?
1 Like
Personally you are being ignored by the ‘centralisation’ of Terra - however if you ever embark on creating your own solution and business - take note of my user info and ping me - I will be there to invest
4 Likes
Why are the validators not voting? WTF is going on with the fix? Is there another proposal that makes more sense than this one? If yes, please link for us to understand.
3 Likes
…centralised
I checked their proposal,it’s in the right direction as it aims to de-leverage UST and enable a 50% collateral at all times.
It is similar to the narrative provided in step 7 and can be addition/replacement.
“step 7
“In conjunction with that, enable 80% (could be variable) of UST inflow capital to automatically go to a collaterized insurance fund that wll support LUNA and not US””
This step was proposed again in trajectory to add a redundancy and de-leverage UST.
The 50% collateral as proposed by Origin, acts as a insurance as it guarantees UST to never go below 50% of it’s value in case LUNA side of collateral experiences a meltdown. In order for it to work it has to be an asset with no price exposure in my opinion (unlike the BTC reserves that were put to stress themselves as the crash took place).
However, the porposal, needs more clarification of how they would prevent the death spiral tipping point. The collateral swaps are not an optimum solution in my opinion.
Overall the proposal is good. It would require a more restructured logic on the UST issuing mechanisms and is generally in line with the things we proposed.
8 Likes
Thanks Nikola for this proposal. One of the few that makes sense.
@dokwon needs to really stop talking about the fork and consider how your solution could be implemented.
3 Likes