Terra Ecosystem Revival Plan 2 [PASSED GOV]

No to fork. From simple economic, burn supply and increase in price should follow and, dont follow policies insane Biden.
Can anyone tell me at least, should I keep my 100… almost worthless tokens on my binance account or just transfer them to the wallet???

1 Like

why would you wanted to fork , fork only make it wrose only way is to burn the token

2 Likes

what will happen to us luna holders and with our losses is this solution? can we just exchange our luna to kimchi at least has value to eat,…

I have a proposal to request for a new coin airdrop distribution -
Everyone before depeg should get the tokens back as 1:1 ratio. And after the depeg whatever the dollar value of coins they bought for should get the coins according. This way you’re making everyone happy and at least we will feel good about not losing everything in our capital that we invested. We had NEVER SOLD SINGLE COIN in the faith of the project and to be a long term holder. That never selling any coins has become our punishment of the lifetime. Everyone around us told us we should have gotten our capital out asap the price went up. But nope our 21 year old son thought LUNA IS LEGENDARY coin. IT WILL NEVER EVER FAIL. That belief left the biggest scar on our lives now that it’s becoming so hard to get over it. Losing money is never a fun and that to a $140 k. But losing this way is even a harder to cope with. Not selling a single luna token and not getting our capital out was the worsts decision of our life. The pain is unbearable. IN GOD WE TRUST. GOD BLESS EVERYONE!!

1 Like

I think the things you are going to address now 1) Save the trust of the community investors in the project team. If you lose the trust of community investors, even if you fork 2 3 4 5 6 forks, it is useless, because no one will invest in them. Let’s take a step back and say that even if you fork on the new chain LUNA and the old chain Airdrop, that is only an increase in the number of a currency holding address, because investors do not trust you, so I still want to say, please don’t think of other methods, you must analyze this time from the perspective of investors events, so that you can solve this matter faster and solve this matter perfectly

There is no need to create a new chain from my point of view!
Make changes to the current chain!
Create a new token and connect to the Luna and UST chains!
In the first step, airdrop a significant amount of Luna and lock the airdrops for 1 year!
In the second step, offer a new token added to the chain!
The pattern should be such that printing a new token causes Luna and UST to burn at the same time!
Simultaneous printing of Luna and USt also burns the new token

Consider the print count limit for the new token!
For example, the maximum number of printed 3 billion tokens!
The current pattern has two dimensions - two dimensions either grow or destroy each other - Luna has always needed a third dimension in her chain pattern!
Print new token tokens (up to x number) = burn two Luna and ust tokens at the same time

Burn new tokens = simultaneous printing of Luna and ust
Inflation in ust = burning Luna
Descending ust = Luna print

1 Like

What happen who had LunaX/Luna LP before 7h may?

How about a spoon :joy::joy::joy:

1 Like

The plan sounds like a socialist 5 year plan from the Soviet Union, already built in design on forcing to hold an asset. The people have suffered enormous losses, they need help and hope now and not in 4 years, who knows if there will be in 4 years free cryptos at all. Printing money and 2-4 year forced plans bring no value … you can see that in politics , it is no different here.
This collectivist social plan is a waste of time and resources. Besides, what guarantees that Luna 2.0 will not suffer the same fate again?

Crises are in life always the most efficient source of improvement, the bigger the crisis the bigger the chance and the market always finds the very best solution and above all the very fastest solution.

The right way in this crisis is to :

  1. burn the inflationary coins & temporaly increase the TX fees to compensate the UST holders. there are several proposals that make sense.
  2. Make the concept of algorythmic stablecoins more resistant to such attacks. Otherwise, you can soon wipe your ass with algorythmic stablecoins.
    By simply crapping out Luna 2.0 and distributing it arbitrarily according to a complex socialist plan will not produce any value. Sticking one’s head in the sand, the problem will not be solved. Don’t you understand that the business model has a bug that needs to be fixed.
    Our smartest heads should look for a solution here. This is also in the interest of the entire crypto community. I think only approaches to strengthen the existing business model is forward-looking. The fork is only politics and weakening.
4 Likes

Time to step down, go hide somewhere with lot’s of security before they find out what really happened and your in jail within the next year or so with your pals. Just my opinion.

2 Likes

25% - UST holders at the “Launch” snapshot

and he said UST first, now its last, not even snapshot before de-peg, pathetic

2 Likes

NO FORK.

People, there’s a vesting period of 2 years!!! you won’t see your money ever again. This plan in designed to let Do Kwon off as easy as possible. He’s going to create more fake money, backed by absolutely nothing, with absolutely no value, and lock you into it for 2 years. This will be his THIRD project he created that didn’t work. Enough is enough.

There are better proposals than this heap of garbage. VOTE NO.

6 Likes

Reserved. why not=)

@dokwon Please don’t fork it! Burn the current supply of luna

3 Likes

Sounds like a double scam rug pull, it’s simple. Burn the excess supply not create scam v2.

3 Likes

Might seem a crazy idea, but here’s my 2 pennies worth.

  • why not turn Luna into a decentralised community coin with a fun feel to it like shiba inu.

  • Through staking let the community votes on the direction of the coin

  • let lunar classic act as a canary network for V2 to mitigate any future catastrophies on the main V2 chain.

*Use lunar classic as gas fees for the V2 chain.

*Burn lunar used as gas or first use it to pay back UST holders on a full 1:1 peg

  • Let the community dictate the various burn mechanism to reduce coin supply on the old Luna network.

*Let both v1 and V2 be a means to pay back the UST holders on 1:1 basis over time.

  • And finally don’t call it Lunar classic call it Lunar canary and walk away as project lead for the old lunar and focus instead on making V2 and Terra successful whilst ensuring all terralabs future projects benefit old Luna in some capacity.

It really is that simple and everyone is happy. We have 2 chains and also the hope that through creative burn mechanisms still a good Dev team and a solid community both chains can thrive and Terra can rise through the ashes.

Thank you for the reply, you’ve now provided some specific problems to talk through.

Okay…but the only reason it’s even partially profitable now is you making bank off of #FOMO. Yes?

If there’s a burn, it’s going to trigger more #FOMO, thus triggering more fees, thus triggering more payments to validators due to volume skyrocketing (if the proper messaging is put out to the community that this is the course of action).

What are we missing?

Aren’t they already?

And if they’re not, you’re still dealing with worthless tokens on both sides. A fork isn’t going to fix that.

So you’ve given your stance. Awesome.

Do you speak for all validators?

Maybe there are validators who are more concerned about saving the eco in the long run with something that has stronger community support.

If true, maybe you shouldn’t be a validator, especially if the only reason is to make money off people (which you are now, by the way).

Do Kwon has never answered what happened to the excess BTC reserves. That’s smoke.

Additionally, if this were a Japan business, the executives would pull out all stops - including coming out of their own pockets, loans, etc. - to save the business. Thus why Sharp Electronics is still a thing, for example.

Maybe Do Kwon needs to start doing some selling.

This makes no sense. A holder can take for profit as the price of the tokens (both of them) climb. Many have done. That’s better than total loss AND you can implement fair tax structures to help expedite the process.

2 Likes

Its pretty obvious what they are up to.
Bail out Developers and Validators. (Maybe also some VC)

They were paid for their work and actually the only ones to make money in all this project.
But many of them are also big holders of LUNA. So now, in addition to their earnings, they are bailed out twice in two different categories as “developers” and “LUNA holders” as well.
They have no intention to work for years to come in a burned project without making more money, just to bail out some old liabilities.
So they create another project, to forget about liabilities, work for profits again and also restore the pre-crash distribution of the project they are working on.
Current distribution is messed up and not acceptable for them as they are no longer big bags.

3 Likes

But those who bought before attack and after attack will get double airdrop is not this injustice
Simply do rationalize the following circulation toward pre attack current circulation/pre attack circulation/ number of current luna holder and request all ust holder to sell entire ust to buy luna .
Once we summarize the percentage wise holding to distribution

I don’t agree with Do Kwon’s proposal. H/e it would be interesting to continue to bring value to LUNA making it a sort of real testnet. Similar to the relationship b/w Kusama and Polkadot. Given the experimental nature, having a proving ground is a step in the right direction.

1 Like