[Proposal] Distribute 50% Transaction Fees to the Community Pool + Increase Proposer/Validator Rewards

Governance & Proposals
135

Can you make a proposal to reopen the IBC channel? It passed 2 times but developer is not responding

2 Likes
136

Where we can find the community pool status?

1 Like
137

Set your wallet to classic and you will see the community pool details and check time to time to track it

139

Appreciate.

ในวันที่ ส. 18 มิ.ย. 2022 17:15 น. MOUSTAPHA_SHAHBAZ via Terra Research Forum <[email protected]> เขียนว่า:

140

现在什么进展了？

141

Hi,
Can someone write the transaction fees pool link? thanks

1 Like
142

Is this the automatically implement proposal ?
I remember you said that it should be implemented after 7.7 days

1 Like
143

Following the validators supporting the classic chain voicing their preference. Please spread the news (however you can) that we need everyone already staking on LUNC validators to re-delegate their coins to the following LUNA Classic supporting validators (Instructions included) with the aim to grant them 67% voting power.
We need to change the voting power dynamic and this is how we do it:
RedelegationCandidates.pdf (528.8 KB)

P.S. I know the above is not relevant to 4080 however it is towards 4095/3568. Also, (insider information) @dfunk is coding as we speak a smart contract for the realisation of this proposal’s key objectives.

2 Likes
144

@godoal Please read my latest posts and check yourself. We really don´t have to change voting power. Re-enable Staking/Delegation to Existing Active Validator Set Only - #203 by tolben

1 Like
145

Thanks for the heads up @tolben, when possible please provide some comments on the questions asked in regards to your post.

[Even if things pan out and the classic chain re-democratization succeeds it is worth having a record of those validators helping us out throughout this difficult journey]

1 Like
146

The call to arms (please refer to the discussion with tolben on his link above) with the aim to give more voting power to our LUNA Classic friendly validators stands.

147

What needs to be done friend, I have a small but growing community of luna holders, Luna Classic, I am for any seething, write clearly what needs to be done :handshake::handshake::handshake:

1 Like
148

Hi @Dudik, this is the information I was referring to :point_up_2:

1 Like
149

@dfunk

Looks like the recent re-enable of staking/delegation has been successful. Per Station, the staking ratio increased to 3.66%. Among important proposals, one that keeps the Community Pool liquid will be of importance. As this proposal passed a couple of months ago, I’m sure it can be tuned post implementation.

To prevent future overlap of proposal [4080], we should look at short-listing testing and implementation without delay. Your comments are welcome. Thanks!

1 Like
150

As I understand about this proposal. You want to give staker more reward so that they stake to secure the network. It sounds good but I suggest to make a little adjustment. How about we make stakers have more reward if they stake longer. Like staking of 1 year gave them higher percentage reward and those who stake 1 month only is lower. This way the network is more secured.

1 Like
151

Hello!

Quick update:

The smart contract as per the provisions of this proposal is live: https://finder.terra.money/classic/address/terra1wy2zdqqs34hcdpmyqcfmnvxrje60m8z2xax5l7

The source code and instructions to use the contract can be found here: https://github.com/dfunk009/dfunk_contracts/tree/master/contracts/luna-distributor

A total of 10 dapps have participated in whitelisting their addresses and have shown inclination to continue building on Terra Classic. These include:

  • Terraswap
  • Astroport
  • Spectrum Protocol
  • Loop Finance
  • Aperture Finance
  • Soluna
  • Eris Protocol
  • TFM
  • Lido
  • Prism Protocol

The whitelisted addresses of these protocols can be found here:
https://github.com/dfunk009/dfunk_contracts/blob/master/contracts/luna-distributor/whitelist/airdrop.json

The Community Pool Spend Proposal for this will be initiated shortly, after further testing and feedback.

1 Like
152

@dfunk How about the part of the proposal where a portion of the Tx fees is distributed to the Core Dev team (if not mistaken it’s currently forwarded to the community pool). Are you liaising with the TR team to get this organized?

Thanks again for this piece of work; It definitely helps keep Utility providers anchored to Luna Classic

153

hey @godoal

yes, as mentioned in the github repo docs:

Amount distributed for classic core development (CD) = 5% of TF or 10% of CP

Further in the doc it also specifies that this shall be distributed to Terra Rebels for their work on the core development of Terra Classic:

The classic core development is currently being handled by Terra Rebels that have their multi-sig wallet at the following address:

terra1067mhg3qwdccep2sp95cca8nmj8ds395w2rue7

The InitMsg of the contract also specifies TR’s multi-sig wallet address for the distribution (which entitles them to 10% of the distribution amount):

“developer_address”: “terra1067mhg3qwdccep2sp95cca8nmj8ds395w2rue7”,

Hope this answers your question :slight_smile:

1 Like
154

I did notice the “developer_address” in the contract code a bit too late but was for the better as your answer covers a few more of my questions about this setup.

What would be the process to add/remove dApp providers on the contract list, should let’s say more wish to come on board the Luna Classic train? Is it just a matter of updating the contract source code, compiling it, and uploading it on the chain while removing the old one?

155

Adding/Removing dApp providers on the contract list is easy - the contract code doesn’t need to be updated and the contract doesn’t need to be recompiled and uploaded. The contract sits at Code ID: 6191 so a new contract can be instantiated with the updated list.