An excellent proposal indeed. Thing is, I think @dokwon will just take the easy way out, and many developers will follow. What remains of lunc if that happens? I mean, do we know how many and which developers support the fork and which don´t?
Terra team just proved they cannot make a decent stablecoin. A lot of people lost a lot of money. After this fiasco no one in their right mind would buy stablecoins from Terra again.
To survive they need to create a new coin (or kill the UST-Luna relationship) and work to generate value to it.
1 Like
@Nikola-HydraChain If amazingly through all Terra’s circumstances there ends up being an original chain or a luna classic andngovernance can be restored to a relatively decentralized working manner would love if you stuck around, especially positioned as a gov rep of some kind. Do you (or any members) run any Terra validators? I would stake.
2 Likes
UST & LUNA can both be saved if the ideas from this proposal are implemented. Point #5 needs a lot more details on the deflationary mechanism, but I think other community proposals for burning/fees have covered that.
One idea for how to distribute disaster funds to those who lost a lot on LUNA - airdrop a new token based on several pre-depeg wallet snapshots. This token can be staked to receive disaster fund rewards or people could choose to sell it. Or even better if there is an easy way to distribute disaster funds just by holding the token in a wallet so that people don’t have the extra step of staking.
1 Like
Because they’d have to explain where the backing assets are and isn’t an instantaneous “reset” button. That said, every person who gets even 50% of their value back, will immediately sell at market. The issue is that do kwon doesn’t realize that UST subverted the traditional banking system and as long as he tries to offer higher interest rates (via staking) than traditional banks, they will wreck every single token he creates that does so. JFK discussed ending the federal reserve, which essentially would have done the same thing, take money away from the banks. The only scenario in which Do Kwon can rebuild from this, safely (IMO), is by dropping UST altogether, burning 90%+ supply, and then offering a much lower yield (if he really wants to keep testing the limits).
This wasn’t done by random people who held a grudge, it was done because it was cutting into the bankers’ bottom line and it seems obvious that every stable coin offering high enough yield to take business away from banks, will suffer the same fate.
You don’t get it, this WILL happen to EVERY stable coin that offers greater yield than a bank. You think it was a coincidence that this happened the day before Yellen went before congress to discuss stable coins??? Come on man…
Yes. It really seems that there was external sabotage (against the entire crypto network) with the (obvious) participation of internal agents (responsible for Luna).
I don’t run a validator. I am simply trying to contribute because the crisis affected the entire industry.
If the community wishes, I’d be glad and contribute more.However, I couldn’t help noticing the mess that takes place on the Terra Station governance section.
I am concerned of the centralized manner on how the proposal from the founders being pinned and also all other proposals being filtered out.
For instance, if you go to the Terra Station , you will see only 4 proposals.
And the one associated with this plan is just invisible.
Same applies for the way the Fork proposal is pinned and all others aren’t.
9 Likes
You are saying all the right things. If you have the same standard of integrity along with your articulates I would find it hard to understand why the v1 community would not get behind you.
Please do contribute more. And thankyou.
2 Likes
Raise awareness.
That means one thing and one thing only: we’ve been f’cked, we’re f’cked, and we’ll continue to be f’cked as long as we remain in the hands of the scammers at TFL and ther king, Mr. Kwon. So, it might be the time to move on by now.
Maybe, another promising blockchain project not run by scammers is right around the corner waiting for us, crypto-enthusiasts.
I will keep my LUNAs as a reminder of how the crypto world can be just as f’cked up as everything else.
Thanks for your insights!
1 Like
Here is a calculation for distributions for 10% holders. Basically for Luna V2 investment for them to break even it will need to reach about $10.4 dollars AFTER 2 years. Theft.
Current Cost:Old Luna → New Luna / V2 tokens at Genesis / V2 tokens after full vesting (2-year)
$50:332446 → 4.8 / 0.72 /4.09 / 10.4
$151:1,000,000 → 14.47 / 2.17 / 12.3
$1510:10,000,000 → 144.7 / 21.17 / 123
$5000:33,131,648 → 479 / 71.94 / 407.7
$15100:100,000,000 → 1447 / 211.7 / 1230
Luna V2 Break Even Price ~ $10.43
Luna V2 Break Even Marketcap: 10.43 billion
Indeed. The proposals disappeari g is concerning. As is LFG having at minimum 221,021,746 LUNA currently staked for voting, which they bought on the cheap and staked just before locking governance staking.
LFG Twitter link: https://twitter.com/LFG_org/status/1526126714719330306?s=20&t=5ZfqT87-ikku5ZuA1r59FQ
Screenshot of same:
Probably much more voting power accrued by now given the inflated LUNA staking returns. I do not think any on chain vote can pass what LFG decides, though the blockchain record of voting may be meaningful somehow in itself as a record.
I will put it in different words if you of course dot’t mind Nikola, it is concerning because its simply censorship by shadow banning and removing/disrupting communication flow amongst members,
as if ‘them’ have privilege do decide all
thats exactly what happens everywhere lately on so called top levels of most aspects of civilised life we are in right now the ‘1%’ decides in the name of all when opposite is true, they decide for their own benefit only, the benefit of very small group of individuals
thanks for you input Nikola and hope you continue your contribution here
as you said the crisis affected entire industry
its not only Terra, the fuses blew off in other projects also
thanks
2 Likes
The question is, how can we fight to get the v1 LUNA fixed. And implement a burn mechanism?
2 Likes
Insist on whatever “LUNA Classic” plan there is to retain the “LUNA” brand and all exchange listings. Usually the fork of a project needs to select a new chain ID and new name and NOT the other way around. They can’t force you to rename the old chain, as that would be a fork on its own as well.
The exchange listings are a significant asset that are part of the key to the recovery. A listing is not trivial to secure.
Whereas if the project gets forked, there may be cannibalization between the two brands and exchanges may be more likely to stick with the original LUNA brand which, as far as I understood will be the new fork.
Considering the high probability for a fork to occur, I’d recomment:
- Retain LUNA brand → insist on reaching out to the public and to the exchanges
- Retain listings and trading infrastructure
- Gain control on all strategic brand assets - website, CMC, CG listings etc
- Elect a new executive board that represents the community
- Dilute the people in charge who led to the disaster and restructure the token economy
- Onboard institutional partners to back the project in place of above
- Economic restructuring plan execution (crowdsourced best ideas from community)
- Migration of all key applications and strong focus on development and engineering
7 Likes
Lol. He proved already more than enough that he is a fraud. I hope he ends up in jail.
I remember last week everyone saying that without UST the network was useless. Now they going to cut off UST. Anyone please make up your mind hahaha
The current chain should be called Luna. Their new chain Luna Sc@m.
2 Likes