It allows you to break out of the LUNC bubble and stake your assets elsewhere in case you have better staking rewards on other chains.
2 Likes
Why don’t you go to other coins WAGNER if you want so badly to break out of the “LUNC bubble?”
3 Likes
No 
, now we realize how desperate you guys are, ,I didn’t hear you in any spaces just attacking other proposals,we don’t know who this guys are their intentions , unprofessionals Rabbi and his team
4 Likes
Interesting prop. I am against Rabbi. I don’t like the way he conducts himself. Very unprofessional and a bad actor. You will need to make sure he stays well away for this to pass.
Saying that Iv no issue with this. More devs to help on chain the better. Everyone needs to work together. Professionalism is everything.
I’d suggest an a AMA on Twitter or through LUNCLIVE.
5 Likes
They did an ama in agora so everyone would be able to participate as the live amas are not structured to include everyone due to time zones.
I personally think this agora based ama worked very well. Did you see it?
7 Likes
Please ask them to share their GitHub profiles for us to judge whether they will be able to do the work or not.
Till now, no one has proven anything to suggest that they will be able to.
This is a billion dollar blockchain, not a sandbox for children. So unless you show some concrete proof of their coding capabilities, this can’t happen.
A few comments on things here and there even I can do.
5 Likes
This is a joke? Go get a job in real life we already have an amazing L1 team, try the same proposal on Lunav2 instead…
4 Likes
Bilbo …
It seems to me that you are proposing to not have a team leader and/or project manager which is a very unusual thing to do in professional team based software development.
If correct, who will be the person(s) who will be the public face to the community to report work progress and pass feedback to the other team members?
Also what project management methodology will the team be following and how will the roles within that methodology be allocated?
I assume within that methodology the team will have a formal means of documenting progress on project deliverables?
2 Likes
It’s a NO from me!
5 Likes
From Happy. With Love… 
5 Likes
The blockchain suffers from a cruel lack of development work at the moment, and everyone has been so embroiled in L1 update and parity development that some parts, like Proposal 11322 mentioned here, have been forgotten, I had forgotten about this myself.
We need that 5% minimum commission fee among our validators (and because it has passed a vote), we need to open up to the wider cosmos ecosystem, and we need to make the codebase as stable and consistent as possible.
I have already given my favorable opinion of this team several times, it’s a YES for me. I appreciate the inclusion of the code of conduct, the team name is also taken from community feedback, in fact, as well as the 2-installments payment. This shows a willingness to be paid on completed work, but also a willingness to listen to the community.
If I remember correctly, I think this has been stated in this team’s AMA or in their “alternative L1 team” proposal, Bilbo and Snake would be interacting with the public on behalf of the team, and I presume one of them, or the two of them, would manage the team.
I would suggest going through the AMA (Look for " [Co-working and AMA with Bilbo Baggins, Solid Snake, Mangochutney, Chopstick Sensei, and notjoshc]" available here in the Agora), I think there’s a lot of answers in there
Addendum : As the final payment would be released upon completion of the work, the initial cost of the proposal would be $10.000, if I’m not mistaken we have ~ $128.000 left in the community pool at the moment after the L1TF Q2’s payment.
The other payment of $10.000 would be done once work has resumed.
In my opinion, this is largely worth the initial investment ! Please put this on perspective :
The first payment for a team of 6 developers (for very useful development work) is equivalent to 2 months worth of salary for a part-time project manager
8 Likes
You guys don’t give up…. SMH
4 Likes
You are unfamiliar with interchain staking, superfluid staking, and the tokenomics involved friend. This is beneficial for the chain and brings a lot of utility use cases, additional interest rate models, volume, etc, etc, etc, etc. It is very very good for the chain what they are bringing and we need it imo.
6 Likes
Everything is fine. It’s just that we know it’s you DemonMonkey. I’m just playing along cause I wanna see how far you can go with the multiple personality dis(o)rder 
Happy, Clay, Trev, Z, Bleeves, all have already talked about you in their videos. Those who are not bots here already know cause at least 1,000 people have already seen those videos by now. So this is futile.
3 Likes
Please reveal your identity, first name, last name, work location we can verify, like Edward kim did, so your transparency can be checked by the community. If not, we’re not going to take the risk of a fancy statement, as happened with the TerraCvita case.
8 Likes
No with Veto, you all showed your true colours trying to take over the L1 team, no one is doxxed fully, no idea the work you can do, nothing to show for it.
7 Likes
Giving 10k to random unknown people is the equivalent of giving 10k to a Nigerian Prince. The bad actors saw how gullible the LUNC community was when we gave 150k to TR, and now everybody wants a piece of that pie.
5 Likes
No with veto!!
I think the community should come together to kick out all the bad actors and validators who support them by re-delegating to validators who are the guardians of this blockchain. because after terra collapse this block chain seems to have no purpose. so many bad actors enter this block chain. most of them hold this coin only after luna collapse and TFL is no longer responsible for the lunc block chain so new investors or those who have hopes of returning the coin price increases in the near future are easy to be redirected and destroyed by bad actors & validators who take advantage of the new investors. just look at the ones who always support the proposal, only the same account-that’s all since the collapse of Luna.
6 Likes
I am shocked by how many of you are saying no with veto or no, I just don’t get it, we have profession developers willing to help grow this chain, yet we have idiots already saying no with veto because they think with their emotions, not thinking critically for the future of this chain.
because if holders like you, we are going NO WHERE!
you are all hypocrites, first you said no to @Bilbo and his team because you never heard of them, now they are willing to work on other structures in the lunc chain, and you still say no??
majority hold lunc for future profits, we don’t hold lunc for emotional friendships!
if this chain dies, you idiots have nothing to blame but yourselves, you think other developers don’t see WTF is going on?
9 Likes