[Proposal] Increase minimum deposit to reduce proposal spamming

Reduce the noise on the Terra Station (Classic) Governance tab by increasing the minimum deposit amount for proposals.

Currently the minimum deposit for creating new proposals is 50 LUNC. This amounts to ~ $0.005 which is basically nothing. Such a low amount is causing a lot of spam proposals making the decent proposals get missed.

The minimum deposit amount of 50 LUNC was chosen when LUNA (now LUNC) supply was 1B.

The current LUNC supply as increased from 1B → 6.9T (a 6900x increase)

Using the same multiplier of 6900x, I propose we increase the minimum deposit on proposals to: 345,000 LUNC.

The proposal will make the following parameter changes:

  "subspace": "gov",
  "key": "MinDeposit",
  "value": "345000000000"

This will increase the dollar value for creating proposals to ~ $35 (at current market price), thereby filtering out some non-serious proposals.

Note: This is a parameter change proposal and if voted will pass automatically.


If there isn’t already a proposal for this, I’m in :+1:


Aprove this , just make the governance proposal


Done. You can find the proposal here: Terra Station

Also, the proposal will make the following changes if passed:

  "subspace": "gov",
  "key": "depositparams",
  "value": "{\"min_deposit\":[{\"denom\":\"uluna\", \"amount\":\"345000000000\"}]}"

I can’t vote, it says “[DecimalError] Invalid argument: undefined”

Are you making this transaction from the Classic chain (columbus-5)? Some others have already voted and it worked fine for them.

I understand what you are trying to do but 2 things.

  1. $35 at current LUNC rates can skyrocket overnight in cases where the price jumps 50+%. What happens if it goes up 2x or 3x in a small span. This would stifle positive governance.

Perhaps a smaller fee, around the $5 - $10 range, and perhaps code it can be auto adjusted so that as proce goes up or down, the value stays the same?

  1. There also needs to be a way to get the legitamate proposals whitlisted, as paying that much for it to go unseen by many would be prihibitive as well.

Either removing the filter to show all or find a way to flag the spam, to be removed or highlighted as spam once ot reaches x number of reports (there shouldn’t be much after this is done anyways).

1 Like

I’m not trying to do any price speculation. 50 LUNC made sense when supply was 1B. Now that supply has increased to 6.9T just multiplying the deposit amount by the same factor which gives me 345k LUNC.

1 Like

I understand what you mean. My point is with these low values and the volitility added together, the value can be easily doubled or tripled in a 24 hour period.

It should be based on dollar value, not number of coins. We will see wide swings on both sides imo.

Also as nothing seems to be getting whitelisted, we need to address this issue as well. Its an opportunity to add this fix to a fix that can also resolve that issue.

1 Like

For add a white list, you have to ask for it through a pull request on the white list.

But I agree that paying a lot for a proposal is not at all democratic and not at all community.
The idea of putting on a white list by a pseudo vote or putting in spam is a good idea. (Sorry I do not speak English )

1 Like

I know the process of getting whitelisted as my last plan was the last one to get whitlisted. Since then no one has been successful getting it done via pull request.

Created a pull request to whitelist this proposal here:

1 Like


But I specify, I have no access on the repo. I just explained :slight_smile:

I can understand it. People who manage the daily life, Dev, Validator and who are out of politics take so much criticism. Better to step by step, that everyone finds confidence between everyone. Even if it is not easy

Also of this is aproved staking must be enabled

1 Like

I don’t think censoring proposals to avoid spam is a good idea. Rather have a higher deposit amount to filter out non-serious proposals.


@rosanne89 I’ve created a pull request to whitelist this proposal. Any idea how long it might take?

@rosanne89 @AtoZ any idea on the estimated time to whitelist this? The pull request for this has already been created.

The proposal has already got a quorum of over 10% with 100% voting yes, so it would be great if you could look into this. Thanks! :slight_smile:

Gl with that …

I will vote yes but i think it should be dinamic like 30 Dollars no mater the value of the Luna, that would change the amount of luna need dinamicly…