If not separate from TFL , lunc will always stay as secundary asset of DK.
Never come close to 1$ !Is it what community want ?
Vote with big YES on this proposal !
I thought it only provided us with the clone of TS,
once sold it passes into the hands of the new ownersâŚ
The personal wallet remains personal but we holders have a new entry portal to monitor the blockchain. Iâm no expert and I could be wrong but I had intuition that they were two separate things.
I remain convinced that TFl is not a good thing for terra luna classic.
Thank you for your answer!
I agree with the others who have pointed out this proposal, in its current form, is too vague. The community needs a budget for how the $150k will be spent.
However, it is imperative LUNC becomes independent from TFL and I applaud this proposal for moving towards that end. The fact many in the community still trust Do Kwon, a fugitive under criminal investigation, is incredible. Even putting legal matters aside, TFL have made it clear LUNA2 is their priority and it is only a matter of time before they start applying pressure on LUNC holders to transition into the new chain. It is naive to believe TFL has any interest in LUNC other than as a source of liquidity for LUNA2.
If Terra Classic is ever going to achieve the goal of becoming the first truly decentralized, community-run blockchain, we need to free ourselves from dependence on TFL.
3 Likes
Hello! I just want to say that Do Kwon being a fugitive under criminal investigation is not correct. For one thing he never went on the run he stayed home and cooperated. More importantly the recent audit found that he and TFL were not malicious operators and took all the expected steps in bad circumstances being the victim of the now identified malicious actor FTX. Not saying they are saints and everything they do is gold but to this day he didnât run.
What I see is leadership which brought our coin to success in the past and has the proven ability to bring that success. I donât care about who runs this coin and I hold no utopian dreams of a community run blockchain - all I want is to make money and place my bet on the winning horse.
A community running in circles with no clue what they are doing is therefore less desirable to me than the guy who already proved himself. Our coin is arguably the most centralized available lets not kid ourselves.
Are we here to see our money grow and explode or are we here to build our own lord of the flies island?
3 Likes
âSouth Korean prosecutors said the next day that Kwon was âobviously on the runâ and not cooperating with their investigation.â
If you want to take Do Kwonâs tweets over the word of South Korean law enforcement that is your prerogative. However, please be advised many of us are not so naive (or acting in bad faith).
Enough oxygen has been wasted on Do Kwon regardless. The bottom line is TFL chose to create a new blockchain and Terra Classic would have faded into oblivion but for the community stepping up to save it. Now that LUNC is showing signs of life TFL wants back in but they already made their choice. Terra Classic belongs to the community and therefore must move towards independence from centralized organizations such as TFL.
1 Like
I think you need to deepen your research a bit mate. The only centralized organisation I know for a fact to have acted in bad faith is the Terra Rebels blatantly with this proposal. Maybe Do Kwon did too I donât know, at least not as blatant. Letâs then seek independence from them. No more lies about independence with TR where they simply donât have to ability to keep up with the needed core development. If we want to be independent letâs then employ those who will work for money, have abiltiy and donât bring their own alternative agenda.
2 Likes
TR have done more to revitalize Terra Classic than anyone else and we would not be having this conversation if they hadnât put in the work. TR has its flaws (putting out an incomplete proposal such as this one for example) but to accuse them of acting in bad faith, especially in comparison to an organization that is literally under criminal investigation, is ridiculous.
Iâm all for other developers working on Terra Classic, but where are they? If someone puts up a more fleshed out proposal for detaching Station from TFL infrastructure I will support it.
3 Likes
And to give you just one example of how well this works, someone submitted a few pull-requests, notified us of it, and we merged then deployed both after testing them, those same PRâs currently sit in TFLâs repo unmerged, its nothing against TFL, itâs just as I said, Luna V1 is not their primary focus.
The hardware infrastructure to my understanding is the property of Neblio. Questions.
- How long will they support RS and under what conditions.?
- Are the endpoints on Neblioâs site or in the cloud like AWS.?
- If for any reasons TR decide to quit , will Neblio hardware still be available to LUNC community and and at what price?
- How scalable is the present Neblio hardware infrastructure ? If it needs to expand who will pay for that update.
- Obviously your RS was in the making for many months also V2.0.3 The parity that we seek with LUNA 2 is this still a possibility? If yes, would the changes require major changes in the coding for RS and the L! chain?
1
In light of the TFL interchain issue should this be attempted? The API will/is broken and appears that terra station, RS and TerraCVita will have issues for some time.
The question then is , should we pay TR for RS which will have the same problem as TS and TErraCvita.?
The hardware infrastructure is the property of Terra Rebels, Neblio donates funds to us monthly with half of that setup to support our infrastructure costs.
As stated, previous in this thread, if Terra Rebels ever decides to stop or no longer is able to support RS. we will work with the community to transfer the infrastructure smoothly.
V2.0.3 is paid work, there will be a spend prop put out that will outline the details of that work and the costs involved.
Thanks for your response although you missed this:
This is a major bone of contention, that if for whatever reason TR walk away and their repos for some reason require a total make over, there will be no accountability. Not saying it will happen, but in the grand scheme of things itâs quite possible. The bottom line however is that the devs need to be paid now.
2 Likes
I apologize if I should not be posting, but in regard to the above statement âthe devs need to be paid now.â.
You should NEVER pay for work that is to be done, up-front.
Would you pay a contractor that is giving you a quote to fix and replace your leaking roof, all of the estimated price, up-front?
1 Like
Reading these comments of bickering and arguments back and forth tells me LUNC wonât be going anywhere at all.
I suggest to run LUNC like a public company with a paid management team which has budget authority and that is controlled by an elected Board of Directors.
Can we rule out a second SBF moment? No. But this governance system of constant proposals and counter proposals and a change in direction every few weeks is more harmful than productive.
2 Likes
I concur. The paid now is tied to statements I have made before.
Is there a way to solve the prefix issue by âappending the blockchain addressâ as the prefix that exchanges , etc use, when referencing address wallets to the LUNC chain ? So say lUNC chain id is âwer345â so a wallet address of terra12345âŚ" will be wer345terra12345âŚâ. This will be algorithmically stripped of âwer345â to have the address. âterra12345âŚwhen tokens are received on the chainâ. when transactions are sent from the chain it will be"wer345terra12345â . Just a thought " I used a similar setup with a PBx system"
This is the best test for us, for the whole community. There are so many solutions in this thread that it would be over at the corporate level, but we are looking for consensus in decentralized management, it is an experiment on a global scale. I am curious myself how it will end⌠My suggestion is to collect the highest notes of the statements are an added value to this proposal and neatly put it together. Rewrite this prop with the wisdom of Rabi 
then even more than 150 grand will come up. There are a lot of ideas here for 1 million USD, each.
2 Likes
I prefer Terra station wallet, if TFL will be updating the wallet why not to be there?, ainât gonna lose all my LUNC giving My mnemonic to TR, is TR trying to control LUNC by force?, In that case iâm gone, iâll sell my inversiĂłn
1 Like
Will do the same for sure!
Nobody is forcing you to use the new wallet. You can continue to use Terra Station for long as long as it supports LUNC and is updated by TFG.
In my opinion TR will have a payout soon for âvoluntary workâ or work to be done. It should not be seen as a payment to develop or use a redundant RS. However, the fact of the matter is that we paid TR $150,000 for RS that is still hosted by TFL.We are promoting parity, so why do we need to pay for a different wallet.? On that note let it be clear that TR will be our employees. Hence , we should not be concerned with whoever TR employ to perform the tasks. What we should be concerned with is that TR will be accountable to the community. If for any reason TR walk away ,then the community has the legal mechanism to hold TR to its contractual agreement. We should be concerned, that what we are charged is based on industry standards. TR should not build anything without our approval and then demands payment from us. The community made a fundamental mistake based on my research and I may be wrong. The mistake is, we allowed TR to start an L1 chain without a scope of work that passes governance. A mistake that may come to hurt us in the future.
Moving forward:
-
TR have the key(s) to the L1 repo for V2.0.3.
Will the community own every bit of codes in this repo if we are paying ?
Will we employ independent devs to audit the codes to make certain they are delivering what they
should? -
Will TR be the only L1 devs?
-
If yes? What happens if cost becomes a problem?
-
Will we be okay with part-time L1 devs? If yes, how cost effective will this be?
How will w evaluate the progress of the coding done? -
We need a comprehensive proposal with timeline for the delivery of the L1 parity chain with complete interchain operability.