Terra Ecosystem Revival Plan

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

Ok so here is my plan is pretty simple and for my thinking is very effective

  1. Use the LFG bitcoin reserve to buy back almost all of the supply

  2. Burn the mayority bought and reduce the supply by a LOT (that is a 1.5b dollar worth of luna out of circulation)

3.use the remaining to pay back those who incurred losses on UST on theyre initial deposit no need to pay for profits why because its better to heal the initial damage but there is NO NEED to award anyone what we need is to rebuild.

  1. Now that luna is back to the billions continue the burning with a slow but effective mechanism using the gas and swap fees for this and build your amazing project back to the top

  2. Luna will have a lot of new investor and will grow places i can assure you that, those who bought during the downfall and trusted and didnt bail and supported even with all the chaos will be awarded just by holding.

  3. For the holder that inccured loses will recieve a part of the un burned token to hold again a similar value of their investment but with unlock mechanism we dont need another dump scenario…

Much love to the community and hope the light in this dark time comes soon!!

9 Likes

Absolutely not. UST was offered as a “stablecoin”; it is an obligation, a liability now due and owing. UST has a promised value of $1.00—no more, no less. LUNA has no promised value whatsoever—and yes, it can even go to zero. In this context, LUNA’s only promise is that it is fungible: Each LUNA is equal to every other LUNA.

I can’t believe that I even need to explain this.

4 Likes

Totally agree.

As someone that owned Luna pre-depeg, I like auto-staking some but not all new Luna.

1 Like

The situation have change.

1 Like

interesting read. @www.theblockcrypto.com/post/146840/luna-foundation-guard-lfg-bitcoin-reserves-unaccounted
will be hard to help the project if the money meant to be for such situation is somehow not to be found…
…a good old saying in finance is “The money is not gone, it only belongs to someone else now.”

Like it or not, any proposal that doesnt include compensating luna holders pre ust peg alongside ust holders will not he popular, will just create war within the community. Compensating both is required.

1 Like

Actually, no. I served time in pelican bay and Corcoran.

1 Like

First off, radio silence is not the way to go! Should be keeping everyone updated instead of disappearing for sure.

SAY :clap: NO :clap:TO :clap: DO :clap:

Why is this thread pinned???

6 Likes

No sir listen to cz_binance buy back the tokens you spawned and burn them you caused the mess you fix it. don’t play innocent this is your 3rd failed project and u just wanna make more? fishy sketchy and stupid.

8 Likes

Like it or not, this is not about being “popular”. It is about fulfilling obligations.

It is irrelevant whether or not scamming UST holders and stealing their money is “popular”.

Compensating UST holders first and foremost is required.

2 Likes

how to stay out of jail for securities fraud 101 right there man

2 Likes

Entonces el problema es, que ust es la stable coin y se vendia con un valor equivalente a 1 usd, que como el problema surgio en el algoritmo de UST, los inversores de luna pagaron los platos rotos de la mala gestion de terra, devaluando la moneda a niveles inconcedibles.

Por lo tanto, como hay que salvar el culo de la direccion, se salva ust y a luna que le jo*dan

that’s not exactly correct, many sold and bought the dip NOT knowing for the supply increase which diluted and inflated the tokens, people did not know that and got fucked. This has nothing to do with normal trading, yes, there’s always risk involved, but the risk here was not calculated and we went to 6.5 trillion coins. This could have been stopped, but it wasn’t, so do not talk about risk here, that was not only the case.

2 Likes

Whilst i agree that ust holders are an upmost priority when it comes to compensation i just dont agree with your opinion that luna holders pre depeg should just accept the narrative of something along the lines of ‘sorry, you knew the risks’. Many luna holders were staking at the time and were even less able to mitigate damage than ust holders. Hopefully a consensus which favours all, not just part, of the terra community can be worked out.

1 Like