[Proposal] Tiered Payback to Luna Holders as Well

Current proposal on tiered payment for UST only isn’t fair to Luna holders. Luna now goes to 0 because of defending the peg of UST. It would be ridiculous if the amount is not made whole for small investors.

I suggest to split the repayment between Luna and UST holders.

3 Likes

they should not even think about this payback. they only way is to bring the ecosystem back through some measures to strength investors’ confident. once this is achieved, the value will come back automatically.

2 Likes

how’s a tax on new demand not the obvious solution to capitalize on all of the attention with a come back story?

Yes this is totally right, they cant just out right think to save one group UST or Luna, both contributed for the success of the project and any compensation should be done equally and on fair terms!

Sorry to see LUNA holder’s loss, but as many people mentioned, LUNA is TERRA’s equity, LUNA holder is TERRA’s shareholder, but UST is TERRA’s debt, in law if TERRA go bankrupt, they need to clean the debt first and share the remain (if any) to shareholders…

2 Likes

Let’s assume Terra is bankrupt completely as we have no idea of the BTC reserve(so there is no way to pay either party), now forking past that is basically a reset from scratch so even if the tokens are created and they need to be distributed to both luna/ust holders, both parties must HODL until the ecosystem is back to its fullest form and hopefully creates value for the new tokens.

Full disclosure: as a luna only holder I fully agree, and the UST holders’ comparisons with TradFi seems very arbitrary to me; $UST holders were speculating as well with the extremely lucrative APY despite the legitimate questions raised. The ‘promise’ that UST=1USD doesn’t seem that air-tight to me, and if they want to take it to court to fight LFG(or was it TFL) I have no problem with that but not at the cost of Luna holders anymore. I didn’t want to say this as I know that the Terraluna community needs to stand strong together, but after reading some ‘proposals’ by UST holders I needed to say this.
Anyway there’s a good way to fight about it: go to governance and shoot it down. I voted no with veto.

Also if you reward the $UST holders only, it means they will redistribute the treasury and (sorry for the harsh expression but) allow them to pillage the remainder of the project while the project goes to dust, rather than keeping it alive so that many people can be paid back over time.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t really matter IMO ultimately because LFG used up the funds to protect the peg… if you look on twitter, a crypto agency called Elliptic tracked LFG’s BTC and they all went to Gemini and Binance to 'market make’(we don’t know if they actually did that but maybe CZ can help with that), so nothing to distribute, so the people who want redistribution probably need to go to court with LFG anyway.

As for DK’s proposal, it doesn’t matter who gets what % at this point IMO. He didn’t say he will compensate anyone, it is a proposal that suggests distribution of a new governance token so if the new project goes well you might get a lot but I guess that is beyond unlikely at this point.
So IF anyone launches a new project, it will be starting from zero so it isn’t a distribution really, just a very small airdrop. I have experience getting these ‘airdrops’ from scrapped projects on an OHM fork and it’s usually a very small amount. IIRC $9USD or so.

Anyway, so I think these ‘tiered’ or whatever paybacks aren’t likely to happen so we need a plan to rescue the existing chain. Of course, it seems the devs are migrating to other chains so I guess it’s realistically all over now but at least we need to try something. I did like Hydrachain’s proposal.

I agree with Lucasvdws

1h

Sorry to see LUNA holder’s loss, but as many people mentioned, LUNA is TERRA’s equity, LUNA holder is TERRA’s shareholder, but UST is TERRA’s debt, in law if TERRA go bankrupt, they need to clean the debt first and share the remain (if any) to shareholders…

A company is allowed to sell shares they own but they are not allowed to sell other holders shares. By minting Luna they were selling peoples share, money that they don’t own. Even in centralised economy this does not happen. This is a outright fraud. So LUNA holders must be paid back in full because people didn’t sell their shares they took peoples money.

There are almost as many proposals as tokens :rofl:

Dilution of existing shares without a majority vote of existing shareholder is illegal, right?