This is 3568. That was a text proposal. 4080 is how 3568 gets implemented as its a paramiter change.
I must have missed something. Where did you see this? Also they would be the same no? Stablecoins are based on the dollar.
My understanding is that tranaction fees would be based on the token, LUNC, not a dollar amount at all. I think you are looking into the future with regards to when we restart the swapping between USTC & LUNC?
Nice proposal! And will add value to a long term hold of LUNC and USTC!
And it will sum up with the 1.2% burn that passed and is ongoing.
Voted. Cheers.
Hi @dfunk,
Nothing against your proposal but I think you really need to be clear and transparent as to who the active developers and validators are, what are their plans if any etc. before putting such a proposal forward.
I mean what guarantee does the community have that these tokens aren’t going to be used to fund development on the LUNA network and not on the LUNC network for example ? Especially knowing that some teams are running out of funds and fighting for the 0.5% emergency allocation.
So far there has been literally 0 communication from developers on the LUNC network (which include LUNC/USTC holders) except for some members of the community and I am surprised @FatMan isn’t asking for more transparency either before giving his support.
just asking to find out. Why paramater change proposal should be implemented ?
Parameter Change Proposals are a special type of proposal which, once passed, will automatically go into effect by directly altering the network’s specified parameter.
Voted. yes
不支持，35%为什么需要社区提案销毁，而不是直接销毁？
Is there any social media group to follow this proposal work?
can help on 1.2% tax burn rate text proposal to parameter change proposal?
Will pay you for this
50% transaction fee?
So who buys?
The burn should be automatic, add the burn wallet to the code so itll auto burn the percentage listed. That would be way better than a community vote every single month. Nobody is gonna want to vote on that all the time. Plus that would raise questions
“The burn should be automatic, add the burn wallet to the code so itll auto burn the percentage listed. That would be way better than a community vote every single month. Nobody is gonna want to vote on that all the time. Plus that would raise questions”
I completely agree
This should be your code if im not mistaken, correct me if im wrong. I dont typically write code and i grabbed the burn address from Do Kwon’s twitter post:
[{
“subspace”: “distribution”,
“key”: “communitytax”,
“value”: “0.150000000000000000”
},
{
“subspace”: “distribution”,
“key”: “terra1sk06e3dyexuq4shw77y3dsv480xv42mq73anxu”,
“value”: “0.350000000000000000”
},
{
“subspace”: “distribution”,
“key”: “baseproposerreward”,
“value”: “0.030000000000000000”
},
{
“subspace”: “distribution”,
“key”: “bonusproposerreward”,
“value”: “0.120000000000000000”
}]
I like this. Cool!!
burn should be automatic. Not by vote every month. Manual system is lazy and Corrupted.
So it must be automatic.
where can i go to vote for this proposal ? Thanks
You can vote for it here:
Burning from the Community Pool will be automatic ?
Yes that is correct it should be automatic. Why was it not added as such?
@Vegas how will this paramiter change happen if the 3568 proposal fails to get implimented? Is the parameters already there to be changed? This is where I’m a bit confused.
I also assume you had done extensive testing before starting this proposal right? Was there testnet testing done, do you have the results to share?
So if I understand this correctly you are earmarking %50 of transaction fees to go to Validators & Deligators.
So based off proposal 3568, this means that 0.6% of total transactions fees will go to the Validator network?