Terra Ecosystem Revival Plan

0.5? there is no so much money in the whole cryptomarket

Too many different ideas, The only sensible thing is to give the team time, my only advice is that the team has to deal with thick people like CZ and others in the industry, obviously who need to overcome the shock and make the final decision. … They definitely have a super ecosystem and I believe we can be reborn.

2 Likes

Guys, Vitalik support Fatman’s proposal. Like he says UST holeders have to be saved first no matter what.

4 Likes

Some funding needs to be raised to save the project. You cant just say lets fork it and end of story, why should the token holders have the assets divided by 7 000?

The team should buy the tokens back and burn them.

1 Like

i dont care about fatmans stupid proposal. i have 700k luna. and these luna i want if the v2 lounches same amount back.

who cares old whales new whales. whales are whales. those who run can cry now, those who buyed the dip should be the lucky ones.

thats how it should be at the end.

i dont like vitalik.

5 Likes

Have you seen this? This seems like a viable solution.

3 Likes

That sounds like a plan, I hope it doesn’t interfere with other interests.

1 Like

If the luna and ust disaster was an event made by someone with a lot of ust and luna ,soo bringing a previous snapshot wouldn’t that make the attacker able to do it just over again?

3 Likes

– (1) Luna needs max supply. Never again from 350M to over 6T. – (2) 400M of 1B new Luna tokens to old Luna holders isn’t enough. Old Luna holders had 100%, not 40%. – (3) Why old UST holders to get new Luna? Why not old UST getting new UST, with the new UST properly stabilized to new Luna using a better algorithm?

3 Likes

Sorry, but this plan will not work, furthermore it is admitting to financial fraud as you are voiding all the people who have been trying to save it currently by buying and holding without giving them their money back. not to mention the exchanges have made it very clear that any fork will not be listed, the chain will be dead.

Fatman’s plan is better, but still not great as it also focuses around a fork that will not get listed.

the only viable solution currently, and it is not an immediate one but a long term plan is Hello There’s proposal, fix the problems in the chain, implement a burn tax to reduce the excess minted tokens while people continue to buy and prop up your project.

It is evident people still believe in this as they continue to buy, you should not squander that goodwill by taking the easy way out and forking which will be the death of this chain

4 Likes

After depeg holders get nothing?
250M for Luna holders before $1 depeg
150M for Luna holders after $1depeg (when tokens start minting)

Whoever held luna during the attacks should get back 50% luna!

It’s before or after de pegged!

Maybe they should do at certain price point, that would be fair.

I mean come on most of people bought after his tweets so how could he only give them back 10 %? Whoever bought during the attacks and hold it should get more.

The one who fled and abandoned should not get anything.

Actually the project needs to analyse what assets are left. Money and trust are gone for now. But there is still a significant number of users and followers - and therefore a high reach and a high potential ecosystem.

So how could this be leveraged? To bring it back to live, Terra will need a investor that values this reach and user base.

With money from such investor, Tera could buy back Luna and burn it. That will stabilize Terra as a first step and regain trust.

As second step Terra needs to figured out how it’s core product UST could be stabilized. Therefore the vulnerabilities that led to the crash need to be made transparent. And then the concept needs to be updated.

Maybe using some USD as collateral? Maybe using a basket of cryptocurrencies as collateral? Maybe even finding a way to cooperate with financial regulators to regain trust from broader markets?

But there’s no way where just pushing ‘reset’ will work.

3 Likes

Everything you said is supported! This is the truth! The community only wants what is FAIR!

I think you dont give enough value to luna holders pre ust peg. While yeah, you can say there is an expectation of price volitility, but for an asset to devalue to 0 in the space of a few days from 60 dollars+…sorry, cant accept your logic there. ust and luna holders equally deserve compensation.

3 Likes

The thing is, what about someone who also DCA-ed on the day LUNA reached the bottom? Now they’re wealthier… even if they spent thousands in prior weeks on LUNA at over $100.
How should we deal with such individuals?

1 Like

This is not fair. Not good. And attempts against the same project and idea.
The ideal would be to let it evolve, manage times in any case, but the algorithm should take the ust to 1 and the moon to what corresponds to it in the market. And if that happened the next whale would think a bit before selling its ust at 0.8, and if it did, the oscillation would be smaller.
I thought that was the project. With those rules we all play, at all times. Also the community projects that should face the crisis, like everyone else, like the investors.
But although this is my ideal, I do not feel qualified to say if it is possible. I accept the idea that v2 is necessary and 40% for ust holders. After all, the investors in Luna knew or should have known of their relationship with you. But differentiating in the distribution between Lunas bought before or after does not make any sense and goes against the logic of the market. I had moons before, the 100$ ones, and I bought at 10$. And I bought again at 1$ and 0.1$ , 0,001, 0,0001… and if those purchases had made ust go back to 1, no one would compensate me for the losses. Definitely all the Lunas must be the same.
Apologies for my English as a translator.


Esto no es Justo. Ni bueno. Y atenta contra el mismo proyecto e idea.
Lo ideal seria dejarlo evolucionar, manejar tiempos en todo caso, pero el algoritmo deberia llevar el ust a 1 y la luna a lo que le corresponda en el mercado. Y si eso ocurriese la proxima ballena se pensaria un poco antes de vender sus ust a 0,8, y si lo hiciese la oscilacion seria menor.
Yo pensaba que eso era el proyecto. Con esas reglas jugamos todos, en todo momento. Tambien los proyectos de la comunidadque deberian enfrentar la crisis, como todos, como los inversores.
Pero aunque este es mi ideal, no me siento capacitado para decir si es posible. Acepto la idea de que v2 es necesaria y el 40% para titulares de ust. Al fin y al cabo los inversores en luna sabian o debian saber de su vinculacion con ust. Pero diferenciar en el reparto entre lunas compradas antes de o despues de no tiene ningun sentido y atenta contra la logica de mercado. Yo tenia lunas antes de las de a 100, y compre a 10. Y volvi a comprar a 1 y a 0,1 y si esas compras hubiesen hecho que ust vualva a 1 nadie me compensaria las perdidas. Definitivamente todas las lunas deben ser iguales.
Disculpas por mi ingles de traductor.

This one is too big to get away with fraudulent action. He already has the regulators coming for him, no room for switching to business as usual.

The only way forward is to stick with LUNA and UST, fix the chain and stop what happened from happening again. the only way to gain back the trust of your community is to weather the storm and rebuild what you already have.

8 Likes

Thank you for your willingness to provide a solution. Still, I think your plan is flawed, unfortunately. The truth is that the community would not be there without the financial backing of the coin. Why would they continue to a new ecosystem and new coin rather than go to a different ecosystem with another coin?

I may be new to this forum but LUNA has been my primary trading coin for quite some time now and I lost a lot with the crash. However being able to purchase a lot for little after the crash, I have been able to make back the money that I lost. It’s not all over for those who wish to buy cheap to make back the large sums that they have lost in the crash. There is still a lot of activity with buying and selling. Even with near zero prices, the trading volume is crazy high. There’s a lot of activity. LUNA may be very low but it is not dead. What you invested yesterday has a 900% increase today. It’s not all over for investors.

I believe that the best solution is as others have suggested, to buy and burn LUNA and keep the same coin rather than fork to another coin and start again. Truth be told, it will not be very expensive to buy and burn a lot of the LUNA at this point. It is the only way to truly keep the community and to trust the coin. A new coin will never be trusted. You will never get the trading volume with a new coin that you currently have with LUNA.

3 Likes