If and when the recently-unveiled ethereum crosschain multisig wallet [0x9538D438d506Fc426dB37fb83daC2a0752A02757] is available for spending for community purposes ~ we should use it ALL (along with the community pool funds not used to develop a stable core (linked below) ~ excess community pool funds) to buy Lunc from āselectā {non-validating} wallets that are holding more than 10 million Lunc and create a law that prevents single (non-validating) identities (confirmed by zero-knowledge proof) from holding more than 10 million Lunc in a single wallet ~ one wallet per confirmed identity and validators cannot own more than 10 million of the Lunc in their wallet that is dedicated to validating/staking.
This will prevent centralization from happening while allowing for a 10 billion supply to be reached.
Offering a premium price to those who hold over 10 million for their excess Lunc (above 10 million) and convincing those holders (of more than 10 million Lunc) of the importance of this reduction & limitation act to the lessening of the division of the market cap will support the act without forcing people to sell their excess supplies of the inflated supply. This will take convincing, not force.
All wallets not claimed (after a zero-knowledge proof identity linking phase) can also be claimed by the community and burned ~ unclaimed wallet burning phase.
Those who refuse to sell excess Lunc (above 10 million units) will only prevent community goals from being achieved and should be negotiated with until satisfied to sell excess Lunc (all units over 10 million).
How to get those who refuse to contribute to community goals to contribute will be the difficult part of this act.
The preceding accompanies the following core design:
Hey mate. I think limiting investors is not a great move.
I want to keep my LUNC.
I donāt think administering and policing identities is a good move either.
I donāt believe in world government enforced by LUNC
I still love you though.
I am trying to figure out how we will get to a 10 billion max supply if 10 people hold a billion Lunc each and wonāt give any of it up for sale to others or to burnā¦ Or, 20 people hold 500 million Lunc and wonāt give any of it upā¦ and so onā¦ our goal of 10 billion max supply is an impossibility without some sort of guidance and full community participation.
What good is a system with 10 billion units in the hands of 10 or 20 or 40 people? Activity and tax/fee revenue and staking/validating rewards will suffer. Lunc will turn into an abandoned mansionā¦
I am just trying to make sense of how we will achieve the supply goal of 10 billion maxā¦ I believe we need āotherā limitations in place to reach supply limitations (scarcity) that in association with demand (a stable core code) gives value. And, we can do that all while maintaining decentralized control and privacy through unified community actions.
From todays perspective it is hard to see how we can reach 10 billion before we travel on through the universe. But our response has to be one that attracts more investment, more freedom to trade and do business. The buzzword is utility. And I have to believe a whole bunch of people much smarter than be are working on that. Lunc will thrive with utility which is the precursor for adoption. TR in my opinion see it the same way hence their roadmap Terra Rebels. United We Stand
I donāt think a tax or a restriction can turn LUNC around not in my lifetime nor ever. But imagine the return of an associated stablecoin. That is utility that I can understand. There is a lot more happening I likely donāt understand. But I am convinced thatās the shit thatās going to make our day.
And if not, all goes to shits value goes to almost nothing - that is when the burn tax will start working. On the brink, it may bring revival. Not in day to day.
The one thing we can trust is the established market mechanisms. Which means somebody holding a billion lunc will pull out when his goals are achieved, and that will be achieved sooner than with the guy holding 200k lunc. That part does not concern me, these whales will pull out at a certain value quite natural process.
What we have to do in my opinion is to find the right way to bring the needed resources to the team needed to develop and run LUNC. And try doing it without being subject of a heist and without pissing off the people we need. Finding that governance without smothering the fire or spilling the pot will be the moment we remember.
We will eventually be required to deal with the āhoarding dilemmaā I am confronting in this thread if we want to get to a max supply of 10 billion ~ itās inevitable. Perhaps a stable and self-sustaining core will cause people to flock here and get hoarders to sell (for profit and for the good of the decentralization of the Terra ecosystem) ~ the burn tax @ 5% (perhaps) should do the rest (lower the supply).
Hoarders need to understand that decentralization is the future ~ and hoarding only centralizes thingsā¦ Do we want a new and better financial system, or do we want the same old problems caused by wealth distribution inequalities caused by the policies of a small group of arrogant and ignorant beings who are miserable and have consolidated wealth by hoarding excess amounts.
Decentralized activities being verified, blocked, chained together and connected to the present (storing of everything everywhere to prevent manipulations) is where we have to go if we want to survive. That decentralized ecosystem requires access to wealth if itās to be successful.
A max holding supply is aligned with that required new financial system (supply cap on all Lunc & USTC and individualsā holdings). Itās those caps that give scarcity. When scarcity is combined with a stable and self-sustaining core, value goes up (Supply & Demand).
If we want a max supply that is much lower than it is now, the only way to get there is by utilizing all ethical supply lowering methods that are available.
Right now, nobody knows what to do ~ everyone is stumbling around in the darkness under the rubble of this once great ecosystem (Terra Classic).
@CosmosCapybara ~ Do you think prop10940 and the ideas of @RabbiJebediah are fundamentally good ideas? You did write; āthank you Rabbi! Pleasure as always to hear your thoughts on thisā in response to his (@RabbiJebediah) newest proposal to distribute community funds without the necessary details required (past, present, and future codings) to justify each transfer.
