Feels like most that work for the tfl as admins or a team one minute say they dont know the team when questions get too tough and they wash their hands from it, and on the other hand they start defending tfl and do kwon when things come out to light as if they know them. Which one is it.
What is the problem here?
That doesn’t say anything about buying trillions of luna
Finché non iniziate ad informare e parlare con la comunità persone come fatman e questi continueranno con le teorie del complotto
Have you make a proposal about this ? Can I have a proposal number ?
the problem is nobody gives a straight answer about what is going to happen about anything!
there are tons of issues and so far nothing. that’s what the problem is.
so if enabling staking would give the opportunity for attacks then what is the way forward exactly? Exactly! is this situation going to remain like this forever?
Same with UST. it’s supposed to be at 1$ but it’s not, and nobody gives a clear answer about what is going to happen. any solution, or going to abandon it completely? ust 2.0? what about this one then?
Same with anchor, radio silence
same with this and that…common what is this? Are we talking about serious people or not? and then you ask what is the problem…what a joke.
5 Likes
Rosanne89, I can’t even imagine what a “dangerous proposal” would look like?? What is worse than the current situation? Would it be “dangerous” if someone proposed opening up to developers and validators? Would it be “dangerous” to require validators to burn x% of their commission till a normal supply # is reached?
I am being somewhat silly, but realistically if LUNC is not viable to the L2 people anyway, what would it matter? Let it go
3 Likes
Is this real?! I didn’t know that!
It is in my opinion completely absurd. This would represent Lunc’s 500,000,000,000 by day for 350,000,000.00 staked.
1 Like
Yes, it absolutely sounds absurd but could it be real or not? We have seen a lot of absurd things nowadays… what is the reason or source of this accusation? Any clarification on this from anybody would be nice.
1 Like
would be nice if someone can either debunk or prove this with solid data.
as a crypto currency community we are not very transparent right now.
now, if you tell me the T1 validators are operating at a loss. Then, even more reason to open up staking immediately. It is not sustainable if the validators are just losing money.
1 Like
I think someone already answered u good enough in general but the problem is you and other admins muted the whole community in telegram, and you and others were saying u dont know the team and what not when you were asked questions about mamy things in the middle of the failure going on. There are screenshots of that.
And now it seems like you know them well enough (atleast better than you knew them two weeks ago) to call fatman a liar in other words. .
And besides I agree with the other reply you got. Can it get more worse than it is? NO. Dangerous proposal was Do’s own proposal. And no it does not state about someone buying trillions but it shows how some eager greedy Validators were fighting for their piece of pie and who gets more while acting like knights. And then they call the rest of the retail investors cockroaches for asking a burn because we got burned. I can bring up so much but you guys are just gonna be blind too it. And by the way they knew when it was going to get halted so someone/s from TFL or LFG or close ones to Do or Do bought a lot of lunc before the halt!
1 Like
Apparently, most of the lunc is concentrated in these dozens of wallets, and the validator knows the exact stop time. Buy a lot at the bottom, and they can also get a lot of airdrops from 10% for new allocations. They call it a risk to buy in the middle, so are you insider trading?
1 Like
Those proposals can include changing anything about the blockchain, re-arranging what addresses hold what tokens etc. as they could potentially execute a 51% attack on the chain itself. Given many/(most?) lunac holders don’t understand that there is a L1 chain underneath their tokens we can’t easily count on a self-regulating system imho. It would be a battle of whales.
2 Likes
What you are saying is basically the community is not to be trusted. They are either too poor and / or too uneducated to protect themselves. So next let’s advocate for a truly centralized protocol aka dictatorship because Do Kwon will always have our best interest at heart.
You see the problem with this? You can’t have your cake and eat it too. When everything is going well we pride ourselves with “decentralization”, “traditional banking is bad”, “cash is trash”… and god knows how many investors bought into these fancy terms and decided to trust their life savings with Terra? But then when crisis actually happened, when push comes to shove we toss all of that out of the window, hold on to the first thing handed to us by Do Kwon no matter how poisonous it actually is… We would rather slowly kiill ourselves than take any risk with any real solution.
What we have right now, this indefinite shutdown of governance and staking is exactly what it looks like: dictatorship.
2 Likes
What I am saying is there should be a plan to prepare/respond to an immediate governance attack and transition while the amount of tokens circulating is >>>>>>>>> the amount staked in governance and there isn’t a clear expectation that people would be able to immediately respond on their own to a malicious proposals or malicious validators quickly enough.
That’s what I am saying. But you can do you and if you want to read in all sorts of wacky stuff you can.
1 Like
Check this gusy luna velidator lunadao account and 1.7 t holding in binance but they guys dont want to burn just playing new game so you guys invest in luna 2
It’s kucoin bro
1 Like
Here is the latest governance discussion.
Please read the diagram and text to under the context.
Vote “NO” on both rounds to advocate a change in both governance and leadership.
1 Like