Once the Depeg started, and i saw that price of UST is starting to trade at around 90c on a dollar. I moved my funds to Binance. I was at that time still believing PEG will return to normal. So i held there and went to sleep. Woke up next day and saw what happened. Sold probably at much lower prices around 50-60c on a dollar. Some leftovers i took out from selling Luna at 10$ and some other alts (after waiting for cexes to bring back deposits i sold probably at 20c on a dollar. Does that make me non Lunatic or not eligible for any reimbursment and only those that still hold UST, aUST should be considered? I strongly believe that’s a wrong take. I’m pretty sure most of us have tried to save whatever they could. And it doesn’t mean they weren’t loyal supporters of the ecosystem. In fact i started saving some of the leftovers just because i believed in the ecosystem almost till the end 
I don’t think it’s ludicrous. Remember, under your suggestion, the only source of data would be the exchange itself. It’s a black box system and we would have to take their word for everything. The exchange would basically have free reign to submit infinite false claims even if they don’t exist. Sure, exchanges like FTX might not do this, but what about KuCoin? Middle management at Binance, perhaps?
If we do this - if we take on the behemoth task of redistributing hundreds of millions to victims - there should be no potential for easy abuse. This means sticking to verifiable on-chain data. Agreed, it’s not perfect, and some people will make money, but I’m certain it’s better than the alternative.
If you can think of some way to unexploitably gather sell basis data, I would love to move forward with your proposal, but from what I can see, it’s completely impossible.
I didn’t delegate my Luna coins thinking they might collapse. I participated at the validator delegation to to protect the ecosystem and coins from inflation and also to guarantee the peg to your ust. I lost everything because the undelegate process was in 21 days.
a refund is up to everyone. right UST, but who had blocked luna in validators? why not?
UST and LUNA are totally different asset. I feel you, but they have no responsibilities about the price of LUNA unfortunately. You invested in a startup which failed. If this company still has some money they have to pay back the debt (UST) first.
after that, community sentiment will drastically change and your LUNA might recover (nobody knows). But that’s how it works.
This is the plan for what to do now, after that there are many proposals for you, including fees on tx to give you or other people back value, burning and so on, just be patient.
When the CEO of Binance is more transparent and communicative than the founder of Terra.
The silence is unacceptable. Where is the reserve @dokwon ?
I’m with @flipside and others here arguing that there needs to be a more effetctive way of dealing with those that sold on the market after depegging.
Pitting those who sold at 99c against those that sold at 0.05c sets an ugly precedent. One could argue those that sold the earliest are the ones with the means to buy back the fastest at the lowest price and still be doubly rewarded - the exact thing you are trying to avoid. Meanwhile those that didn’t contribute to the collapse, that held on until the end and only sold to salvage what little of their savings they had left to make ends meet are doubly punished?
I believe if there had been transparency and communication about what was happening during the event then maybe it would be easier to make the argument for redeeming UST bought back on open market. But that wasn’t the case. We were left in the dark with no idea what was happening. What were people meant to do?
So if half of those that sold early enough are going to be doubly rewarded anyway, why bother punishing the other half? Maybe there’s a comprimise here, lockups or something, I don’t know. But I do know it just seems like a self defeating plan. The same amount of USDC will be paid out regardless. What good does it serve to funnel money back into UST?
Thanks for the post. Some necessary sobering points and food for thought.
My take on a few things you said:
There’s a lot I could say on the topic of Do Kwon but I won’t, because I want for us to work with him and there’s little point casting aspersions. I’m just not entirely clear on this randomly volunteered sympathy for him. Let’s be clear – TFL, and Do Kwon especially, misrepresented their handle on the crisis, and ability or willingness to even mitigate it, both at its outset and during its peak. Even if you chalked it up to a phenomenal case of mismanagement, it was so especially inept that I’d argue it qualifies as criminally negligent. Because Do’s irresponsible little tweets alone, for example, no doubt caused thousands of people mistakenly trust them and lose their life savings. And this is to say nothing of the way they promoted Anchor - the splash page of the website itself says BETTER SAVINGS. No, I have to disagree with you here. Even if there was no malintent, which is certainly possible, then they were too incompetent and lax in their fiduciary duty to be considered innocent.
Agree with your characterization of Luna and UST as equity and debt, as has been done here several times, and the risk-reward tradeoff difference.
You brought up things I’ve thought about but didn’t post here. The part for me where the analogy between corporate debt and UST breaks down is that while UST is debt, it’s not a corporate junk bond – it’s the currency for a savings account. The implications for people’s lives are different.
It is therefore very understandable why some people who were able to sell, sold at a loss and want to figure out where they stand in reimbursement. It’s a group that is tricky for me to think about, because like we’ve already discussed dozens of times in this thread, you could say they contributed to the collapse. But you also can’t blame them, depending on the circumstances. Hard to say. Point though is that it is not quite so black and white.
I would admit that this does involve some temporary concessions from whales. Financial concessions but immensely ethical and eusocial ones. If there aren’t enough funds to make whales whole, but to save the RUINED LIVES – the literal livelihoods and families – of 99, 95, 90% of other users, then I hope and believe we will all work together to do the most good for the most people. That’s what this proposal was originally about.
Also, as has been posted many times, this is not a matter of DAO votes. This would have to be adopted unilaterally by TFL, either swiftly and voluntarily or at the direction of the courts. I hope they do the right thing and see if they act quickly, they can save lives.
I wander about this thread. Do you guys think he might be on to something or just trying to ride on the Luna drama? https ://twitter.com/hellspawncrypto/status/1525575167027695616?s=21&t=VzRFDFIxJWuyMvML8fShog
What time UST depeg ?
include UST LP ?
Which solution to Redeem UST to USDC ? … Claim Air drop ?
Hang in there, Farzam! I know it’s really stressful, I’m in the same situation (kind of…) but there’s hope for this proposal is being embrassed by the community and apparently by some whales themselves which shows it is sound and is the urgent, human thing to do. It could also greatly contribute to save the project in the long run. We’re in this together, hang tight 
What about Luna holders? Is there a plan to refund them since there will be a version2 token as far as I understand?
whatever is decided, one thing that mustn’t happen is the team dumping those BTC on the market.
the whole crypto space has endured enough… that would crash the market even more.
right now, communication is needed on where those funds are and what will be done with them. market won’t move until that happens
My suggestion is that the initial source of the data is the blockchain. The exchanges would be asked for information about UST that was transferred from the blockchain to the exchange. It’s true that there would be no blockchain history for any UST that was bought on the exchange before the depeg and never left the exchange, but surely that would be an extremely small amount, and it could be audited as below.
No they wouldn’t. Of course they wouldn’t. You’re not being realistic. Nobody would let the exchanges do that.
Firstly, the exchanges would have to be onboard with the plan. Then they would have to agree to have the process overseen. That’s what I meant by having it audited. The people in charge of handling the reimbursement will be experienced professionals qualified in exactly this field, most likely an external firm of auditors and/or lawyers
Negative ! A BIG NO NO ! The LFG funds should use to bring Terra back to normal, thus benefit to all the supporters, and UST holders will get the value back as long as they hold UST. Plz focusing on the big picture and stay together. Lots of people have lost including me, but self-interest could not help us go further. Have some faith.
Agree.
Please make this happen
This is the biggest flaw with the proposal, but, like you said, there really is no good alternative. This is the compromise.
Scenario A: A clean airdrop to users who held UST at the depeg. If they moved it off and sold, they get to keep all the money. They not only get what they salvaged in USD off-chain, but they also get a full 100% refund.
Scenario B: No snapshot - just a clean redemption tool for whoever currently holds UST. This does away with the per-wallet cap (people can just make new wallets) and whales who bought millions of UST at $0.10 to $0.25 would suck up all of the refund liquidity with bots, leaving the average user with nothing.
These are the primary proposed alternatives and I think what we have is far better (albeit not perfect). Having people buy back UST ameliorates the double reward problem without punishing those who moved UST off-chain for whatever reason. People who held through everything remain unaffected.
In a perfect world we could track the sell basis for every single user and assign refund amounts accordingly, but this would take literal years and would be open to a massive amount of abuse as I’ve detailed in previous posts, so I don’t see it as viable. What we have is likely the best solution and the lesser of all evils.
I really don’t know why this is so hard to understand. You are relying purely on the exchanges to provide sell basis data. They are the only people with this data. No third party or auditor has this. They can tell you whatever you want, and under your plan, you will be duty-bound to believe them. A malicious exchange would make tens of millions if this plan is enacted.
I find this point compelling. Those that sold early certainly would have a disproportionate ability to repurchase the UST while those that sold late out of desperation would be at a disadvantage. For the reasons explained earlier though, I’d only support the involvement of exchanges in providing price data if on-chain UST/UST derivative holders were prioritized since it would be very simple/safe to compensate them and they didn’t make out with any of their principal. Perhaps a hybrid approach would be the best of both worlds. What do you think?
The creation of a proposal thread is a de facto invitation to provide inputs. Please don’t spam links to other proposals here. This is a space for discussing the USDC refund proposal.
First off, you cannot rewind the clock on this. There is no going back to normal.
More importantly, before any rebuilding can purposefully take place, TRUST must be reestablished.
Repaying debtholders - owners of UST - repairs credibility and regains that trust.
You are asking people to have faith when there is no evidence they should.