It’s all on the assumption that they’re willing to take the money they’ve put in their pockets and that’s the heart of it all
But your proposal is very good, and many places coincide with mine. My thought is also, the number of people the team should fix first, obviously UST has more users. If the problems of these people can be better solved, it will help the team to carry out the work in the future, and the new project will get more trust. On the contrary, if these people are provoked, any project he does will become garbage. will be ruined and imprisoned
I express my opinion. I think UST, as a product with a 20% return, naturally also bears a part of the risk, perhaps a minimum risk of 20% (the specific risk that can be taken is voted by the community). That is to say, 80% of the initial capital is obtained by compensating each person, which I think is more reasonable.
How the money will be paid:
40% is paid to each person directly, and the remaining 40% is repaid monthly through the on-chain wallet.
Of course, a value can be set to give priority to repaying small victims.
How to pay back:
In the snapshot before the attack is launched, the project party first spends a lot of time to find out who the attacker is, so that the remaining people can allocate more compensation
Then the compensation will be issued according to the time when UST transfers the anchor
for example:
May 9 10%
May 10 25%
May 11 35%
May 12 40%
Why do you need to compensate in a step-by-step manner, because users who transfer out in advance with an early warning have a high probability of having the least loss. The more people who switch out later, the greater the loss, and the more they need help
The remaining 40% cannot disappear out of thin air, and the remaining compensation can be issued every month until it is fully paid
May 9 25%
May 10 30%
May 11 35%
May 12 40%
This money is funded by the money earned by the project party and CEO DO KWON. Even if it takes many years. 20% of the project party’s monthly profit is used as the payment
In addition, additional new tokens will be airdropped to UST holders, which will be issued according to the deposit amount and transfer time, with a lock-up period of at least one year. Regardless of the future of the currency price, at least it can give people hope
May 9 UST1
May 10 UST1.25
May 11 UST1.5
May 12 UST1.75
If you had UST on terra station wallet staked on Anchor and moved it to an exchange well after the depeg event occurred you will be fine. This proposal is not to say that people had to hold UST throughout all 4 days on Anchor. As long as you were not removing UST from Anchor and sent UST to exchanges before the 2nd depeg then you should be fine. If this proposal is approved and the redemption amount is determined, you can send back your UST into your terra station wallet and redeem for USDC.
I agreed here. Let’s not forget that the Terra team including Do Kwon came out and said that the priority was the UST, and they must regain the peg of UST (by minting morr Luna)
Therefore, #UST is still should be their priority. I feel for LUNA holders too, but as we know that the risk of holding LUNA is MUCH higher than a ‘stablecoin’, so UST should always be thr priority of the Terra team.
Love the proposal, awesome job @FatMan . However, I think the USDC distribution should be in the form of an airdrop based on the result of the snapshot.
Taking my case as an example, I have sold every UST I could salvage at $0.13; there is no certainty this proposal will pass and having to buy back the same amount of UST to be able to swap is a very scary thought:
If the proposal passes, it will become a race with everybody that sold having to buy back at a different price; it might be a good deal for some, but many people are gonna end-up buying back at a higher price than what they sold for.
If the proposal doesn’t pass and UST price crashes further, we will end up with even less than the crumbles the originally manage to recover.
A plain vanilla airdrop seems much more fair. What is you view?
I had nothing else to do with my UST after de-peg rather than buy LUNA on the dip on Astroport. Never in my life would I thought that this project would go to 0.0001$, such respectable project with $B. I wanted to get into LUNA at first but didn’t want to buy at ATH. I threw 20% of my UST @40$, then another 20% @30$, started running out of funds @1$, woke up the next day to basically 0.000000$ LUNA, yoloed my remaining 10% UST into it and now I’m sitting @~30% of my initial UST.
I don’t see how this can be salvaged at all. If you fork, 1% of lucky people who come in right after system boot will dump the shit out of it, making the rest of us hold the worthless bags once more. If you decide to repay back people with what little funds are left in reserves, you will still fack over many people like myself who tried to buy the dip.
I didn’t lose life savings, but it still stings. I already said farewell to my money at this point. In hindsight, the miners should have frozen the system after the first de-peg to 0.90$. At this point, I think trying to save any of this would be equivalent of pouring salt to an open wound.
Yes, that’s not a problem though, it’s not a war, we are trying to help everybody and as soon as we will hopely have this proposal accepted we will choose one proposal to fix things, fees to burn LUNA could be a good idea
Because as written, this proposal is just what to do now! Next obviously we aren’t saying no to anything, we will all have to evaluate the best choose, burning via fees could be an idea. If you look at the proposals some are already looking at what to do next
Are any of these proposals (this being the best one I’ve seen thus far) actually getting serious consideration? I do not seem the on the Governance tab of the Terra Station Web App - will it even go to a community vote or will it be decided from the leadership (that is left over)? The lack of useful/meaningful updates from and the time between them is only making the anxiety worse.
All my money is wasted, then you say the risk The risk is to invest in the currency, but it has a few percent loss, not to wake up one day to see Luna 87 $ 0.05 and less and less. If you lost 90 or eighty percent, I lost one million percent
Yes. This should be straight-forward to calculate and not impacted/inflated by the round-trip inflation of UST in/out of Anchor earn.
When an investor deposit UST into Anchor earn, it’s really a swap of UST for aUST. UST price was designed to be stable/pegged to the USD = $1. aUST was designed to increase in value over time… incorporating the yield from Anchor earn (worth around 1.25 UST near the depeg).
From a wallet transaction perspective, you will see the initial swap from UST-aUST which will include the price of aUST at the time of swap.
In a simple scenario where an investor made only one UST - aUST swap, you would take the value of aUST on their initial swap and subtract it from the value of aUST at the snapshot. This will give you the amount of the interest that they had earned.
Honestly all these plans seem way too complex to ever be achieved.
There should just be a snapshot predepeg on LUNA & UST Holders.
UST Holders get priority refund as it was a stablecoin not a speculative asset, if more funds is left LUNA holders get refunded too. Both refunded whether they sold or not ( avoids all impossible calculation and complexity bs )
Directly on wallets for those on terra blockain, with funds sent to exchanges for cex.
Now how can they refund, Terra foundation has X amount of BTC left, they have to communicate how much, if it’s not enough to refund they can make an agreement to refund in x time when btc price has recovered enough to refund everyone.
More fair would be to refund minus the part sold if it’s not too complicated.
