[Proposal] Tiered repayment: 1:1 USDC refund to all UST holders up to a certain cap per-wallet using LFG funds, favouring small wallets

Seems the best way, once most UST fixed it will be easier to find a solution for everybody.

How about LUNA holders who bought LUNA during attacking time to help save the ecosystem, because we trused Do Kwon with his tweet https://twitter.com/stablekwon/status/1524164780189126657?s=20&t=fqxX3TOCWDoHc2UQsisi5w

Lunatics = only UST holder ? Is that what you mean ?

Btw. love how my posts above are flagged to suppress different opinions on the matter, nice understanding of governance and decentralization you guys have.

1 Like

Under this scheme, why would anyone want to use the L1 over several others like Cosmos? Its reputation would be tarnished and nothing would bring those billions of dollars back. It would make us into another EOS or NEO. No thanks!

hahaha… @FatMan, i see, not biased at all… I assume that’s the same answer you would give if you were the one putting money into UST or terra during the crash… Always helps to try to see things from the perspective of the other person too, not just yours

We should abandon personal biases and look at the most rational way to deal with reimbursing people, as well as groups that were affected the most. Throughout the thread (including the OP) I have explained why UST is better to save. I got burned on LUNA too, but what’s done is done - I can’t make the impossible happen. There are just too many factors at play in terms of a LUNA revival that make it a death knell.

You are right. I am open to hearing contrarian opinions. However, I would want those ideas to be backed by sound reason and logic. I think you fundamentally misunderstand how the value system at play here works. You seem to think that by rolling back the chain and supply, all the money will magically come back. Yes, you can roll back the supply (how will you deal with the thousands of people that bought LUNA on exchanges during the dump? I don’t know!), but the market cap of LUNA is still <$5m and you will get no money back. Nobody will buy LUNA. Its only purpose was to stabilize UST, after all. So I will change my criticism to - please stop posting utter nonsense in this thread. Please think about what you’re proposing.

I suggest you look into this thread by @axtina, which involves a revival of LUNA and the L1. Although I don’t agree that it’s the best solution forward, it is at least reasonably rationalized. It makes far more sense than your half-baked idea of reversing the supply which accomplishes nothing.

For what it’s worth, I did buy thousands of LUNA at sub-$1. Even though it has crashed another 99%, I just don’t believe I should be rewarded for it. I knew what I was doing and I took a risk. It’s very different from buying a $1 stablecoin and putting it into a savings account. I am trying to look at things from every perspective and I apologize if it’s not coming across that way.

9 Likes

Dude Terra is one of the biggest Cosmos ecosystems and LUNA is way more than a peg holding mechanism for UST. It appears you haven’t even used the chain for anything other than depositing some money into anchor and it shows. There won’t be any algorithmic stable mechanic going forward for the foreseeable future but Terra the L1 will prevail.

2 Likes

So you think the people who put money in because they believe that the project is gonna survive and look longterm should be the one the pay for everything… if that’s your idea of “fair”… talking about any asset in crypto as “safe stable asset” is just nonsense… its all speculation… the grayscale btc premium being just one of the recent example… so what about all the people who bought grayscale trust shares of btc at a 30% discount at grayscale and pocketed in the difference…

Im all in favour for trying to sort this out all clean and saving the community but people who took the risk and still take the risk need to be rewarded because thats the only way how the market regulates itself

Sorry if inappropriate to post here but any thoughts on this: 8 Steps to Save Luna now - Economic Refactoring Proposal from industry professionals - #27 by krusty

Snapshot is definitely necessary. I had to remove my anchor when there was a risk of a hack on the Terra blockchain, and I am unable to withdraw if from the exchange now (kucoin)

I think we might be living in two different universes. Or maybe you’re a time traveller from 3 weeks ago. You have seen what happened this week, right? Terra is finished and we need to revive it - this is the way. Without a plan like this there will be zero activity on Terra. No fees, no staking, no validators, no LUNA, nothing. Exactly zero.

Sorry, I’m not quite sure what your point is.

4 Likes

It’s important to remember that TFL already committed to protecting the UST peg. A lot of people didn’t sell because they said a rescue plan is coming. Seeing as it appears they didn’t raise outside capital, this is the next best option we have. If we don’t help the community before attempting to revive the ecosystem, there won’t be anything to go back to. It will be a dead/dying chain and considered a scam. We have a good opportunity to make people whole and save Terra’s image.

2 Likes

My humble suggestion as I am also in a bad state due to the Luna crash. All my savings are gone within 1 day.
I agree with the team who try to reatore the project so as to restore the confidence.
Can the whales or founders, who have been holding a large number of tokens, start burning their tokens to save the situation?
Also, possible to look for Elon Musk to help and explore ways to integrate his projects togetber and build an even stronger and more robust platform together.

This is a pretty important consideration. Even if I personally thought that buying up trillions of LUNA tokens was the way forward (it’s not), TFL would never agree to it. Their position is clear and they’re the ones with the money. They have already chosen to save UST and I am suggesting the mechanism by which they should go about doing it. It’s not a LUNA vs UST debate, it’s just a what do we do about UST debate.

2 Likes

Let me put it another

GBTC & BTC difference = 30%
risk: GBTC keeps dropping
reward: potentially pocket in the difference

take the potential reward out of the equation, and people won’t put $0 into GBTC goes to 0 in a heart beat…

Now back to terra: whats the point of taking the risk when it keeps dropping when you have all the risk and zero reward for it.

1 Like

Again, I don’t know what you’re talking about. How is gambling on the GBTC premium relevant to my recommendation regarding how LFG should distribute their remaining funds to protect the UST peg?

2 Likes

Thanks

Just have a look at this quote of yours and make sense of it…

You could also rephrase that statement.:
“it was super clear that crypto is a speculative asset and it was clear to everybody that you could loose 100% of your assets in any point and time as it has happened many times in the past… people who didn’t to their research on that don’t really deserve to be saved…”

If all things were just so clear as you try to make them look, life would be easy

Not sure how much TFL/LFG still have in their treasury. I remember before depeg, there was roughly $14bn deposit in Anchor, let’s assume 30-40% are from smaller stakers, that would need $5bn to pay back. Is there a way to see how many wallets and related transaction interacted with Anchor?

I agree. We all bought some LUNA at a small price, but we knew it could crash or go to 0. When you buy a stablecoin you have to be safe, or people won’t come again.

2 Likes