Terra V2 Upgrade: Fixing vulnerability, restoring the whole value of UST, creating a multicollateral, and maximizing LUNA value [Independent proposal]

Agree. Likely the model may could be an appropriate adaptation from the current one implemented by MakerDAO. Included.

1 Like

Not sure I agree with this, This would give speculators that bought luna right before the halt at .005 USD a 25X return on UST. This would result in an unpegged UST with Luna V2 as you are migrating the same imbalance to the new chain. What should really happen is that .005 Luna = .005 UST, restoring balance to the system in the new chain.


Snapshotting is a ridiculous solution to those who invested after the halt on places like pancakeswap using wormhole. A more amicable solution for ameliorating inflationary affects is to place a tax on whales.

1 Like

ok but how do I move luna from exchange to burn it to luna2? I always kept it there because I didnt want 21days lock for my lunas (stake). Now they are stuck there and I believe this is many people’s case


Decided to expand it some more to get concentrated feedback, would love to hear thoughts.


This is a great and fair proposal!

Do you want to give any rights to UST and LUNA holders before the snapshot too?

Looking at the LUNA Go Forward Proposal they intend to allocate 40% to UST holders that have hold onto the UST and 40% to LUNA holders at the time of the snapshot.

Maybe the two proposals can be combined so relatively more weight is given to the LUNA holders before the death spiral.

This would mean:

  • Convert LUNA V1 to UST with your proposed ratio using the May 9th balances.
  • Add this to everyones UST balance at the end of LUNA V1/ start of LUNA V2

Divide the 80% that is now allocated to these holders in accordance with this ratio to mint LUNA V2.

1 Like

The one and only question the crypto industry should ask itself is:

Do we really need stable coins?


Why are we trying to support, and rebuild a flawed, slavery system on the blockchain? Just pair with bitcoin, and nothing else. On and offramps to buy bitcoin are already there, without stable coins! Use REAL fiat to buy and sell.

Just a thought while everyone is blindly staring and overthinking a ‘solution’ to find the best algorithm to keep a coin stable. It will collapse. They all will collapse. And the coin it pegs to also collapses. Thats why we have Bitcoin. :wink:

Getting rid of Stablecoins will free the industry.


I think stablecoins were needed because Terra was looking forward to achieve mass adoption of crypto in general. Bitcoins are too pricy to be used in real life


Anyone is free to consider that stablecoins are useless tools and thus refuse to invest on systems that offer stablecoins. Or the opposite, consider multiple use-cases and applications for these, and offer a sustainable and profitable system with a promise of peg.

If you are the former, you likely chose not to use on stablecoins such as UST and not to invest on LUNA because, so far, you find no value whatsoever on this kind of proposition. However, it looks there might exist some real applications for stablecoins and value on their systems as they are being demanded, offered, and valued. Thus there is also the latter.

Anyway, that may be other topic, here we are just trying to fix a situation after a exploited vulnerability so that Terra can continue functioning as flawlessly as possible.


This is very interesting, you are really making many excellent points of how to implement the multicollateral USDm stablecoin. If you don’t mind I’d like to include a link to your proposal so that it redirects to your proposal for the specifications regarding the second step of this roadmap. Please keep on it. Thank you trix!


This point is also very interesting. Most exchanges has reopen deposits and withdrawals for both UST and LUNA. This kind of issues have already happened in the past and, logically, the exchanges have been collaborative when there has been a consensus approved by the network. Following your reply I have specified the necessity of including the appropriate withdraw bridges in the exchanges so that these funds can also come back to the main chain, kudos.


I disagree.
Let’s the stable coin algo do its work.
Ust will repeg.
Market forces will help.
The Terra foundation should buy and burn LUNA over time in the future to reduce hyper supply.
Slowly and steady will build trust back.
And both Ust and Luna will be saved.
Taking a snapshot and kind of reverting the Blockchain will destroy the community credibility as transactions on Terra Blockchain should final. Always.


The idea with that is to return all the possible surplus of value available back to all the LUNA holders since the upgrade. Your point is interesting. I really doubt that the identification of these tradings can be a feasible task to even consider the possibility of excluding them appropriately from the surplus as a realistic alternative. In fact, if possible, the last proposal from @dokwon it is related to your point and makes a lot of sense: saving these who hold since before the depeg and these who bought 5 minutes before the halt. His last proposal is quite good in my opinion; though, if technically feasible, introducing the multicollateralized stablecoin can add lots of value to the network to as well.

1 Like

My thoughts:

  1. Remove the UST stable coin algorithm.
  2. Buy back all the Luna. (Use your BTC reserve)
  3. Burn the Luna until we will be at the acceptable level of circulation
  4. Institute a UST refund plan. (May take a long time)


  • If you deflate the Luna most likely people will retain it
  • Having a plan to refund both Luna and UST is twice the job
  • Luna team (c/o Do Kwon) are willing to help.
  1. That is already mentioned in the 3rd step, as UST would be burnt to mint LUNA v2. The 2nd step also suggets that the stablecoin usecase might be maintained and its value restored by introducing a multicollateralized one. This could expand the value of LUNA v2 (which currently is LUNA+UST or 1.8B+2.2B) by x2 (which is mostly AVAX at 9B); and with the stablecoin again by x2 (DAI at 7B), going closer that may be ideally represent the fully recovery point (which would imply a x5, somewhere between SOL and XRP). And, the greater and sooner the recover, the better and easier.

  2. Are there reserves yet? If so, yes, by all means; the sooner the better for the network, and for the reserves. Any value under 0.2 may be a bargain for UST buy and burn before implementing this or a better proposal.

  3. That is also mentioned in the 1st step.

  4. UST would be converted to Luna V2, and its place would be got by the new multicollateralized stablecoin as explained in the 2nd step, adding its value of usecase again to the network.

So, yes, it looks we might be agreeing for the most part and proposing mostly the same roadmap.


I Agree With CZ’s Opinion That You Create V2 Version Will Eliminate All Old Investors And When V2 Is Completed There Will Be No Investor Confidence. They Will Sell All Their Luna At High Price! That’s a mistake . Try to find a Way to Burn Old LuNa Just Like How You Raised Them

The reason why the project still exists is because of the luna deal, the investment of investors in these days, actually still snapshot?

I am not sure if it’s me who is not understanding you or the otherwise. LUNA v2 would not imply a fork but a financial restructuring. Both investors groups, LUNA and UST holders (yes, UST holders have been “lied” in the “promise” of a stable peg, and thus their stable savings have been transformed into volatile investment tokens) would be part of LUNA v2. Thus the proposition of burning both LUNA and UST at these rates, in the best intent to restore the maximum amount of value for the network, which it is already explained and justified in the steps 1 and 3, and the two comments at the end of the proposal.


Forget the idea of an “snapshot”. We are using multiple conversion rates just to maximize the value of the network, match the higher reserve value of attraction that is possible for each user, and maximize the value of restoration for each user segment. We are not travelling back in blocks.

1 Like

What about holders of wrapped LUNA on CEXs like Coinbase?

1 Like