Proposing an Interim Gorvernance with included Burn from volume taxation

Here I quickly tried to outline important measures to be taken into account. By now the community is deeply divided and in a whole loss. A new vision is needed to ignite a significant capital inflow into the system which can potentially recover most losses while preserving the network and it’s integrity and security.

Feel free to post this anywhere on the forum or Governance & Proposals. Any numbers in here are just examples and can of course be changed.


  • Gourvernance has to be saved → „ Interim Gourvernance “ – all Gourvernance voting rights will be „locked“ for a year (from the pre-depeg snapshot). Means that new holders will have no voting power (like-wise compared to preferred shares but same token, can be reversed after a year) for a year. In the meantime money flowing from the LFG fund to all to receive former value and de-dilute the diluted tokens
  • De-Peg UST from Luna for now and buy UST from Spot Market via Fund to keep constant upward buying pressure in UST and in Luna via burn → get in contact with exchanges to set up an extra markup/commission on LUNA trading pairs
  • Devs and LFT/LFG need to be saved and salvage to keep the development going and creating a reserve again
  • Validators/Stakers have to be included and will be reimbursed to reach former Value in USDT to incentivise network safety, because from a percentage point of view suffered the most of dilution of their share
  • Luna/UST Holders will be reimbursed to former value in USDT/USDC/BUSD (whatever coin it will be then)
  • LFG Fund will be set up that will track transactions, coordinate and sent LUNA/UST to holders addresses that suffered from losses
  • Main Target will be to keep community together and slowly recover losses for most, instead of saving something for some or create a Fork and run away and using speculators as exit liquidity for LunaV2

Seperate groups with separate interest

  • LFT wants to keep building their ecosystem with all the devs
    → Trust has to be restored in the ecosystem. Runaway to a new chain does not solve the issues. It is in fact discriminatory to a large proportion of new inverstors
    → LFG fund needs to be restored to help devs as well

  • Community Fund/LFG
    → Will receive a big chunk of the taxation revenue to build up reserves for devs, staffs, grants and so on to keep the system intact (which is their primary concern I think)
    → LFG can coordinate the transfer they have all the data. Every transaction has to be disclosed openly

  • Validators/Stakers want to keep their voting share as they otherwise would be diluted and the gourvernance could potentially be attacked, which in the long run servers no one
    → Therefore the community solution has to include them too
    → This group will build the „interim gourvernance“ together with the devs and steere the ship for the next year
    → Denying them of their former gourvernance rights will result in fork
    → Any value in Staking contracts can be reimbursed (up to former USDT value +3%)

  • Normal Luna and UST Hodlers from pre-peg with no selling activity after snapshot
    → Will be recompensated from Fund over the time to reach former USDT/USDC/BUSD value +3% p.a.
    → No selling is a true commitment to the community and should be rewarded in the long run

  • Normal UST Hodlers that sold during the downfall and were essentially part of he bank run that lead to this mess
    → Will be recompensated up to 90% of their value
    → Base could be: UST from pre-depeg – UST sold after de-peg = Sum in UST to be reimbursed up to 90%
    → Selling UST can be understood in emotional terms but shouldn’t be rewarded

  • Normal Luna holders that sold or DCA`d all the way down
    → Essentially tried to DCA and keep the system from deteriorating, but will not be part of reimbursement because of the assumption of appreciating prices which could potentially recover losses. Not everybody can receive funds, other groups should have priority first (see Devs, Validators, small UST holders etc.)

  • New Luna Hodlers
    → Can keep their tokens, but will have no voting rights to support network security due to „interim gourvernance lock“
    → Prevents possible attack on the governance and security of the network
    → Incentive will be speculation that will possibly result in in more capital inflowing which is necessary at this point due to non-existing LFG reserve.
    → More capital outflow will slowly bleed the ecosystem to death. Beeing envy of speculators that got in cheap will result in worse. Let all the volume inflow and use it to power the taxing mechanism, which will result in recompensation for the former community.
    → New Hodlers/Speculators now essentially build a new chance for this ecosystem

    1. Potentially millions of new users that will be hooked to Luna and use appreciating LUNA/UST within the ecosystem
    1. Keeping money inside the system
    1. Develop the unique unsers numbers even further. Use the publicity and the volume now. The network can potentially have a massive users base and recover even faster due to positive news on the market

Goal of this proposal:
The main goal of this proposal is to discuss this version of a wealth transfer from a taxation mechanism with incluced burn, that does not devalue any arbitrage or lower trading volume. 3% is too high, something like used in UK/Ireland stamp tax is suitable and doesn’t have a hugh effect on trading volume (e.g. like 0.05 % - 0.25%) like proposal ([Proposal] BURN and REMEDY fee with each LUNA transaction 💊).
Afterwards the pegging mechanism needs to be fixed ASAP from which I recommend to fix the underlying economic incentives (see this proposal: [Proposal] 8 Steps to Save Luna Now - Economic Refactoring Proposal From Industry Professionals ).

Every group should feel free to discuss this proposal as common ground as well as the underlyaing numbers and implications. These numbers are just quick thoughts and can of course be changed.
Huge speculative volume can be used now!

Ego, envy and selfish reasons of any group will result in desaster.

  1. Only „burning the supply“ is no sufficient solution, because of governance, security and former investors that lost a lot will not go with this solution
  2. Only recompensating UST holders will result in desaster with UST holders maybe get 10% for a Dollar while everybody else looses more and the ecosystem collapses due to the capital outflow
  3. Only recompensating LUNA holders will result in the same outcome
  4. Ignoring the needs of Gorvernance, LFT/LFG and Devs will resulte in Fork → money inflow is needed → Igniting a vision for Terra for the market → capital inflow
  5. Denying new speculators or investors their right to make profits because they bought lower than others before will also end in disaster. The only thing that previous Luna/UST holders can get is restitution and no profits unless they also speculate, which would have a compounding effect to the market. The profits have to come from speculation because there is no other way to get money into the system. So if some groups in the community can’t accept that others are making profits and possibly even getting rich as a result, no one will win in the end.
  6. Make no mistake. The whole ecosystem and all holders, users and devs are stake. Forking will not resulte in the desired outcome, because it depends on the exit liquidity of retailers that have a little to none part of the forked version. → Speculation is shot down, after de-peg retailer will abandon the system and LFT looses potential 100,000s of new users forever or the years to come.

The proposed numbers in here are only for discussions. I have not all the data that is needed to come up with reasonable numbers, but I would like to show up a risky speculation based re-ignition of the network.

I beg everyone in here to think about this measure and come up with thoughts that are intended to heal and re-balance the system in the long run.

Nobody will be rich in a week, nobody will be recompensated in a week. This can only play out in a longer run and can potentially be more sustainable than the proposal that only favor one group but excludes every other. Come together everyone and bring something to the table.

1 Like