This is exactly what should happen! What a great proposal and I really do hope this goes through.
1 Like
Totally agree, we have to find a solution for the people who are staying.
If people buy back USTs and put them back in their portfolio, a discount must be taken into account for each tranche. Otherwise it would be unfair!
It will take two snapshots predepeg and postpeg.
Still no reply from Do/TFL/LFG on this proposal? When do we start to proceed with legal action?
3 Likes
100% agree with you @Kirk . Imperfections and edge cases can be ironed out later in detail. And many newcomers are asking questions that have already been hashed out, although understandably this is a large thread at this point. Might be good to have a FAQ at the beginning, @FatMan . If you agree I can even assist in putting it together.
However, bottom line is, we are all in this together and no one here is trying to rip off anyone else. What we need is recognition and response from TFL. It’s only going to happen if we keep up the pressure.
5 Likes
Thank you. Yes, I agree that we should first get the general idea looked at and approved before getting bogged down with the nitty-gritty.
I agree with you. The proposal is quite anti-whale already, though. A whale who pulled out $500m from an Anchor wallet and dumped UST, for example, will still only get the $50k (or whatever the cap is) maximum refund.
The idea here is to refund as many small investors as possible - investors that bought UST for $1 before the depeg. This is the best, most practical way to go about it. The original plan sought to cut out whales entirely, but we added an amendment after some community discussion to make the plan more equitable and more in line with real-world solutions like FDIC insurance.
4 Likes
The “whales” aren’t the focus of this proposal which is weighted towards small holders. It’s the people who used UST as a savings instrument. You may not like it but this will likely be decided in court. There will be no bailout for holders of the speculative LUNA altcoin who’s design in the first place was to support UST.
3 Likes
Agreed, for now, I’d focus on presenting your UST amount history from terrafinder AND savings and/or trading platform history info for validation. Any other relevant information post depeg can be requested if needed.
1 Like
Exactly. Technically how to be done could sorted out. More concerning is
- there is reserve left? I doubt it
- if yes, would compensate to UST holders? Which type? Only those holding or those sold after depeg, or both?
1 Like
Supporting this! I still have aUST in anchor under wallet terra1cy3lllqh0jm6938mj3hpz4w5hyllj4e3jennp8
How about UST inside LPs ???
Linked tool do not showing my UST inside LPs
Refunds should be included UST inside LPs
+1 I agree a lot
There are a few of us organizing legal action. I’ve begun reaching out to lawyers and law enforcement in Singapore. Not what I want to do, but TFL hasn’t yet demonstrated interest in discussing this in good faith with us. Not that they’ve rebuffed us or even disappeared, but there’s no active response either. Just more of the same frankly shitty communication. So we have to cover our bases in case they don’t even engage us.
There are a few legal remedies we can enact - crypto actually makes it more possible than fiat currency. In particular, there is one tool available to us immediately which, like I said, I don’t want to do, but we have to be sensible. PM me for more info if you’d like. Trying to keep discussion of it off here. Either way, we are proceeding.
10 Likes
I like Fatman’s proposal but what if the US government bailed us all out and bought UST as the official US token lol We Can Dream 
1 Like
Thanks, that gave me a chuckle.
1 Like
Isn’t this also create double spending. If I have 100K aUST deposited and panic selling when depeg and get 40K, now I have the cap at 100K. You said there will be no double spending, since the aUST already gone, but they can actually bought it again in open market at lower cost and redeem it at $1. They make a lot of profit this way plus the 40K they already pocketed.
1 Like
I lost >250K from my 390K savings I had invested in UST in Anchor.
I am not a whale, nor a billionare.
What’s the rationale of the cut at 250K$?
I think that the if Anchor was being marketed as a “savings” product, we should also cover for what someone who worked his entire live may have saved (at least cover until 500K!)
1 Like
250k is just an example. The cap isn’t known yet because we don’t know the size of the LFG reserve remaining. The rationale is that there isn’t enough money to bail out all UST so we have to prioritize the good for the most people possible.
The double reward effect can only be mitigated. It can’t be erased entirely due to how highly volatile UST became. It walked up and down through several price levels so people exited at various times. We can’t track every single buy/sell for the aforementioned reasons (primarily due to fraud risk), so the best alternative we have is to make people return the UST in order to get their refund. Yes, some people will make money, but they’ll make less money than if we just do a direct airdrop to holders at the time of the depeg.
I agree. I think you should get all of your money back. Sadly there’s not enough money left for everyone to get everything back, and we need to ration it out. The cap won’t be $250k - it will likely be lower. You will get something back. You will get more back via this proposal compared to if the loss was completely socialized amongst all UST holders, though, since this proposal is weighted towards smaller holders with an FDIC-like restitution system where each wallet is prioritized individually up to a certain cap.
1 Like