Reviving the Terra Classic Chain: A Proposal

Governance & Proposals
1

Introduction:

The Terra Classic chain has experienced a significant downturn in recent months, leading to decreased adoption and use among its community. As a result, it is important to take action to revive the chain and restore confidence in its future prospects.

In the spirit of this approach, I propose the creation of a new NFT marketplace that will drive adoption and usage of the Terra Classic chain.

Benefits of an NFT Marketplace:

Creating an NFT marketplace on the Terra Classic chain offers several benefits:

Increased adoption and usage of the Terra Classic chain: By providing a platform for buying, selling, and trading unique and scarce digital assets, an NFT marketplace can attract new users and increase the overall adoption and usage of the Terra Classic chain by attracting new liquidity to the chain.

Revenue generation: An NFT marketplace can generate revenue through transaction fees, which can be used to support the ongoing development and growth of the Terra Classic chain as well as helping to further the burn.

Increased visibility: An NFT marketplace can help to increase the visibility and awareness of the Terra Classic chain, attracting new users and investors and positioning the chain as a leader in the NFT space.

Implementation Plan:

In order to successfully launch an NFT marketplace on the Terra Classic chain, the following steps will need to be taken:

Development of the NFT marketplace platform: This will involve building the technical infrastructure and user interface for the marketplace, including support for the creation, issuance, and trading of NFTs.

Marketing and outreach: To drive adoption of the NFT marketplace, it will be important to engage with the community and promote the platform through various channels, including social media, online forums, and other relevant communities.

Partnership building: In order to establish the NFT marketplace as a leading platform in the NFT space, it will be important to build partnerships with key players in the industry, including artists, collectors, and other NFT marketplaces.

Governance: In order to ensure the long-term sustainability and success of the NFT marketplace, it will be important to establish a clear governance structure that allows for the participation and input of the community.

Budget:

The following budget has been allocated for the development and launch of the NFT marketplace:

Development: $150,000
This category includes the costs associated with building the technical infrastructure and user interface for the NFT marketplace. This may include the hiring of developers, designers, and other professionals, as well as the purchase of any necessary tools or software.

Marketing and outreach: $30,000
This category includes the costs associated with promoting the NFT marketplace and engaging with the community. This may include the hiring of a marketing firm, the creation of promotional materials, and the implementation of online advertising campaigns.

Partnership building: $20,000
This category includes the costs associated with establishing partnerships with key players in the NFT industry, such as artists, collectors, and other NFT marketplaces. This may involve travel expenses for meetings and negotiations, as well as any fees or commissions that may be required.

Governance: $10,000
This category includes the costs associated with establishing a governance structure for the NFT marketplace, including the creation of any necessary legal documents and the hiring of legal counsel as needed.

Contingency: $40,000
This category includes a contingency fund to cover any unexpected expenses or unanticipated needs that may arise during the development and launch of the NFT marketplace.

It is important to carefully manage and track expenses in order to ensure that the budget is being used effectively and efficiently.

Conclusion:

Creating an NFT marketplace on the Terra Classic chain presents a compelling opportunity to drive adoption and usage of the chain, generate revenue, and increase visibility in the NFT space. By taking the necessary steps to implement this proposal, we can work together to revive the Terra Classic chain and build a bright future for its community.

1 Like
2

But there already is a NFT marketplace that exists on this chain.

About your budget: How are these numbers generated? Who is doing the development? What associated return can anyone expect from this marketplace?
Is it built as a dapp?

Many details missing.

2 Likes
3

Do you want to spend $250,000,- On something we already have? Maybe I don’t understand something? Maybe the marketing companies something like, from a colleague of a colleague? I agree Lunc dies, it’s our decisions and inconsistency and privatization as above, no stability of massacre!

4

finally someone who cares about the community while everyone is else trying to suck up all the liquidity this coin may have BILBO IS TRYING TO SAVE US NOT TERRA REBEL STATION NOT TOXIC STATION BILBO!

5

Great idea. I think @Thorchain.BULL is also a big supporter of leaning into the meme coin heritage & embracing it.

An actively run NFT market place is an awesome way to drive onchain volume & boost user engagement.
One thing to consider if this is funded is issuing a governance token for this project, you can issue enough to your team to ensure you’re able to guide the dApp through initial stages while also airdropping a the majority of the tokens to all LUNC stakers. That is also a great way to boost engagement.

@Tonu_Magi there are several NFT market places; however, all but 2 are abandoned. One of them they no longer let you pay with LUNC & can only pay in LUNA2.0 & the other actively encourages people to list their NFTs for JUNO & not LUNC. We need a good NFT market place that is actively maintained & only accepts LUNC or USTC as payment.

1 Like
6

I’m definitely missing something here.

  • Community funds the dApp. dApp creators get the 250k and community gets what split of the revenue?
    Besides exposure and possible interest - what is the upside or concrete models backing it.
    Is exposure and possible volume bump the upside?

  • Who is the team behind it? What timeframe are we looking at?

  • Paid in milestones, through TGF or straight CP spend proposal?

  • Budget has been done with possible options. e.g. - may need to hire, mayhaps not, travel could be needed, yet perhaps not. Sounds awfully vague and shooting from the hip.

2 Likes
7

How would the profits be distributed?

Does everything go back to the community or does a percentage go back to the proposers?

8

None of the requirements you listed were present in the Terra Rebels infra/wallet proposal, yet that passed with flying colors. I do wonder if the same sentiment would be levied against this prop if TR had submitted it 1 week ago before all the current drama. I suspect the NFT marketplace would have been welcomed with open arms, just as TR’s infra/wallet prop was. Curious how there’s a double standard for these things.

Having said that, I do agree with you that the proposal needs further revising and more details. I do hope the author will take into account the feedback here, and use it to iterate on the prop until it meets a higher standard.

Shalom! :pray:

2 Likes
9

It’s “trust me bro” prop. You have to say how to make and when finish before funding.The product must come before funding.
We don’t trust you without any outcomes.
TR’s case again…

2 Likes
10

We have the TGF for this stuff make a plan a submit it there…no more funds request in agora.thanks…you need more details before asking for funds…

11

Curious indeed. You are a perfect example of this double standard.
I remember you trying to mandate that Faffy accept FIAT instead of LUNC, while with 11030 you were cool as a goat, having Rabbi milking it, with the payment form being native token to this chain.

As to my standards:
11030 had:
Who delivers - check
What we offer - check
When we deliver - check
The cost - check.

That satisfied my curiosity with it.
What does this one have, besides a description of an generic space. It’s function, need, application and funding receivers being different, with a proposal that lacks any and all technical specs or basic necessary info, while promising transparency and detail and says it’s a necessity on budgets.
I don’t know. Raised a red flag. You got me. Your investigative skills are par to none.

12

Nothing you wrote has any bearing on this proposal.

Untrue. But you seem to have an axe to grind for some reason, though.

I was against 11030, check the Agora comments. As for the Faffy/dex prop, yes I still think it should be done with a FIAT payout - just like this current one here is.

None of that is true.
Who delivers - TR overall, but without a specific dev listing
What we offer - Rebel Station that may or may not function as intended
When we deliver - unspecified; they said 2 months, but there was no hard contract
The cost - unspecified; if you recall, 11030 was the 1st of 3 or 4 such spending proposals.

If you’re going to try and roast me, then at least get your facts straight.

I know, it’s a gift.

Shalom! :pray:

13

You seem to have a knack in ignoring facts and making up your own storyline.

Everything you have an issue with can be used exactly in the content of this proposal.

If it’s a team - they would need to present each and every team member with detailed backgrounds. Do I hear doxxing?
NFT marketplace - what does it offer for us? It too may or may not work.
The cost here is ballpark figures that don’t have any specific need and are all based on perhaps, maybe, maybe not. 40 000 for contingency? Sounds about vague as it can get.

But back to your original concern that made you tag me and start talking of a different proposal alltogether, questioning my integrity and whatnot.
What axe is that, Rabbi? Or are you simply scouring the forum and looking to chat about every commenter to discuss unrelated proposals since you like to argue with them.

I propose that you stick to the topics at hand and clutter the space less with personal accusations and instead focus on structural plans.
Totally off topic, but your latest proposal for 3 months moratorium is well written, long and ultimately useless waxing since it’s not a parameter change that can be enforced, instead it’s an opinion piece. A write up why you feel world is as it is.
It is…for the lack of a better word - clutter. And such clutter is everywhere in Governance.
Saying this - it has no meaning, such as your words carry little meaning, but it does create distracting noise, doesn’t it? NFT proposal is suddenly an afterthought and here we are discussing why a 3rd party individual didn’t ask the same questions for a different prop. I’d say you lack consistency and focus, but I guess you already know that and it’s not silly mistakes from a retired rabbi, but instead intentional actions.

Hot a gutn tog!

15

Tonu I’d like to say respect your elders

1 Like
16

I skimmed through your repsonse, sadly failing to see anything substantial or coherent that would add to the topic at hand.

With that we can conclude that this discussion is now over.

Have yourself a nice day. :slight_smile:

17

Can we just discuss things rationally without having everything constantly devolve into arguments, please? This signalling proposal was put out to get a temperature from the community with the intent to do further refinements to it. I’m trying to gather community feedback here to further refine the proposal, and everyone arguing over things that have already happened does nothing to help me with that, and it certainly doesn’t help the chain.

Everything about this proposal is going to and is expected to evolve. That’s why it’s here on Agora for discussion, and not put forth for a vote on Terra Station already. Yet most of what’s happened in this thread has been non-productive infighting. We need to be better as a community or else we are going to keep driving legitimate developers away because who would want to come forth to this kind of environment with a legitimate proposal? Something has to change. Can we please stop all the constant arguing that gets us nowhere and focus on improving the chain and community?

It’s Christmas guys. Please take some time, enjoy the holidays with your family, and let’s come back for 2023 with a fresh mindset and work together to answer the question “How can I help the chain and the community?” - Let’s be better as a community and leave the gong show that has been 2022 behind.

It’s time for us to stop looking back and start looking forward.

1 Like
18

Well, for starters as constructive feedback:

List the team.
List the specific details how the budget is created and why it is as is.
List who would be the owner or receiver of the proceeds from this dApp.
Who will the contingency/marketing etc budgets fall to? Getting back to the team part here.

I know you had quite a few things to say for TR prop and I’m surprised how yours is devoid of any information and questions so far have gone unanswered or have received a general statement that NFT marketplace would be a good thing.