Proposal to let the COMMUNITY decide what to do with the off-chain funds.
Every proposal right now involves centralizing the funds on the hands of a few. My proposal is simple, everyone who had 1 million LUNC staked this morning (Nov 1st) gets 1 vote on deciding what to do with the money. Each month we could let everyone propose ideas on what to do with 5% of the funds and then have a vote. If no idea gets a majority of the vote, we burn the money. That way we force the community to debate and start agreeing on what to do. It is a very simple but powerful proposal that could ignite actual community debate instead of letting whales or a few devs decide on everything since it does not seem to be working. I believe that forcing collective intelligence into consensus might revitalize creativity.
To summarize my point:
4lex’s proposal: pay 9 people half a million dollars per year for them to decide how to use the 4 million dollars. (Meritocracy).
Vegas proposal: let governance proposals decide how the 4 million dollars is used (basically whales will decide everything). (Whalecracy).
Our proposal: let everyone who had 1 million LUNC staked this morning get 1 vote (Nov 1st). That way the community actually gets to decide on things and every voice counts. (Democracy).
Or just get the ETH, convert the ETH (to LUNC), and burn it all… We have a growing community pool already with enough to fund a couple good coders to stabilize TC’s core… All I see so far are plans to make dev plans ~ I see no TC core system dev plans other than my own and the mention of a ‘circuit breaker’ to keep Lunc & USTC supplies stable and valuable (limited)…
I have been reading your proposal and you make some good points. But I believe these $4M dollars in ETH assets will go up in value since we are in a bear market right now. And since there are only about 300k in the community pool right now, these off-chain assets would be very useful to fund platforms that will bring user adoption. We believe user adoption is the key to revitalize the blockchain.
And who holds them accountable if they don’t achieve results? Also, they want to pay themselves 500k a month to get to decide what to do with the funds! A 500k expense on a 4 million wallet, in 8 years its gone! Guys please think about this. The community’s money, should be in the community’s hand, its common sense.
Your proposal is not democracy as you are only allowing people with more than 1 million dollars staked to vote. You are proposing a wealthcracy. Why is 1 million the magic number? Why not 1 million? Or 10 million?
Right now the way the governance works is that whoever has more LUNC, gets a higher vote weight. My idea is to find a way to let every community member have an equal weight vote. I defined a community member as someone who has at least 250 dollars in staked LUNC. But that is subjective and open for discussion. We could take a snapshot of the past, before this proposal was public. On Nov 1st there were about 27000 of us. 27k wallets with at least 1 million LUNC. If each of us had 1 vote, we would start getting results FAST!
We also have to consider people who make ‘additional accounts’ to increase their political power… Voter ID using zero-proof knowledge may be the answer… while limiting each person with one vote per proposal, validators count as one person.
The best way to burn Luna Classic Tokens A new classic dollar build with three-year stick capability and 250% profit Two two-year sticks, 110% profit A one-year stick of 47% profit The new Classic Dollar will be powered by Luna Classic And with each steak, 50% of Luna Classic is purchased and kept, and 48% of Luna Classic is purchased and sold, 1% of Ustc is purchased and sold, and 1% will be the profit of the makers. If someone wants to withdraw early from the three-year, two-year or one-year stick, no interest will be given to it. At the same time, the profit of the sticks cannot be withdrawn until the end of the period With this method, it is possible to burn a lot of classic luna and increase the price of classic luna and ustc, and the new classic dollar will be accompanied by great profit.
So we are still talking 27,000 potential voters. Which I think is fine for big picture, long term goals and decisions, but fails for day-to-day management. There is a reason that no government or business runs on a true democracy. In a true democracy you either get mob rule when emotion takes over and/or things take forever because everyone has to have their say and you have to give everyone enough time to vote. So for big/long term issues I can agree with the kind of thing you are proposing. However, I still think it fails on the day-to-day. I really think we need an elected board that is tasked with making daily decisions. They given a scope of power on what they can and cannot do, what they can and cannot decide and an amount they can spend. Anything outside of that scope goes to a full vote.
Buy more LUNC tokens.In this way, you will truly prove your loyalty to LUNC and increase your influence.
Or maybe you want to influence our community with just 1 LUNC token?
The more token shares you own, the stronger your vote.
So it has always been and so it will always be.
I think otherwise. It is true that democracies are failing and always the best bullshitter wins an election. But this wouldn’t be a public democracy. Only the 27.000 members of the community that believe enough in LUNC to have had 1 million LUNC staked two days ago when everything seemed hopeless. I believe our collective intelligence has a lot of value since most of the engaged community members are devs, computer experts, web developers, trading wizards and investors. Of course a lot of them won’t make good decisions, but I believe there would be factions debating leadership if you had to convince the community to get funding.
sell ETH, use 50% of the profit for grid trading on LUNC/USDT or LUNC/BUSD pairs to move the market and appreciate funds, buy LUNC for 50%, distribute among validators and collect quarterly to fund blockchain needs (developers, managers, etc…)
That is not a bad idea, but what I am proposing has more to do with who gets to decide which devs get funding. I believe the community should get to decide.
Pretty nice proposal, tbh) A little correction: community could distibute stakes to different validators and accumulate rewards on community pool wallet. These rewards use for common network goals through governance voting. But first, the assets on the Ethereum wallet must be moved to the community pool wallet.
Yeah, sorry. I’m a bit worried that the community will probably never be united in the decision to use these funds. Ultimately, the managers will have to decide. They just need to adjust their payouts, at least in my opinion. The amount that Alex mentioned in his proposal seems quite high to me.
It is also a question of whether these managers will do development work or just make decisions.
That’s why I am thinking of a system to penalize the community for not agreeing, forcing them to debate. Right now, not a lot of debate is going on between the different factions. If a % of the money is used to burn LUNC if we don’t reach an agreement, I believe the community will start to hurry up in reaching consensus.
if we don’t reach an agreement, I believe the community will start to hurry up in reaching consensus.