To the remaining Validators on LUNC

My plan is in your hands. I reconize the importance of your role in the ecosystem so I want to do right by you, as well as the community at the same time. Heck we are ALL part of the same community and NEED to work together as one community.

So this thread is for you, the validators. What do you want to see as part of a LUNC revival plan?

I look forward to having many discussions with you so that we ALL can save our community from becoming another ghost coin.

Message me here, or go to,

Twitter -
Discord - LUNA Classic & UST Revival plans
Telegram - Soon
Email - [email protected]


Support your efforts and hope it pays off.


1-Do Kwon’s Grandmother
2-Do Kwon’s Grandfather
3-Do Kwon’s Cousin
4-Do Kwon’s Sleeping strip
5-Do Kwon’s Plush bear

Only one person has a plan and it is unconditionally approved. I’ve been on the forum for days, I haven’t come across a validator or an official. If yes, reply pls;

Can you explain with a diagram how the 6.5t Luna was suddenly produced and to whom it was sent ?
Who are the attackers, what action was taken against them…?
Why doesn’t management want LUNC supply to decrease ?


Thank you. Need more validafors to get this through. It is taking time to reach out and communicate with them which makes this part of thepro ess take longer.


If you want to pass any plan at all, do what Do Kwon did: talk to the validators directly, email them, call them, and most importantly, give them personal benefits (free tokens etc).


That IS what I am doing. Messaging them has been a difficult task as many dont seem to respond, want to be found, or no contact availability.

That said, I am working on it and making progress slowley.


who would follow a complete noob other than other noobs who have even less knowledge.

they will vote a COMPLETE NOOB as leader ROFL

1 Like

with the price of luna on bybit if you do airdrop2 for those who purchased ustc!! it would stabilize the network very easily!! I would really like lunc at a considerable price because I entered at 10$ but I only have 23000 lunc that doesn’t solve my loss of ustc and lunc

we need to enable staking first. most of current voters are v2 supporters, they might stalemate or block lunc proposals just to support v2

I’m not disagreeing with re-enabling staking. I think that is needed. But 2 obsticals that need to be overcome are.

  1. Getting the current validators to agree and vote in favor of a plan to re-enable it,

  2. Enabling other protocols to ensure the system remains stable, healthy, and safe from attacks.

This is why a plan needs to be in place to do both of these and more in order to get a yes vote to move forward.

We both want the same thing.


A melhor coisa era terem mantido so a luna que agora e lunc! Tenho 23000 lunc presa a 10 dolar cada meu unico capital!!a % que eles dao nao serve para nada nao chega nem próximo do valor!! Se tivesse mantido so a lunc feito nfts para recuperar capitalização e feito staking teria cido mais bonito!! Assim como eu deve ter mais pessoas presa muito acima na lunc sem condição de se posicionar na luna v2! E acredito que a v2 vai desvalorizar pois ele deixou baleias presa na lunc eles vao manipular ate derreter ela!! Pois eles quere o que e deles e a lunc nao monstra nem uma reação a meu ver nem o ustc!! Se desesperar e temtar coprar a v2 pra segurar agora vai ser pior!! E na verdade a lunc nunca era pra ter acabado e sim uma retomada a longo prazo e bem planejado!!

1 Like

How about promoting to involve new validators? I mean at this time, LUNC is affordable in price to allow new validators on board… or I’m wrong whit that?


That is difficult as any of this relies on the current validators. While fhey will be ok with adding to theircpositions at these low prices, they may not want to be teplaced.

Our system has set a limit of 130 validators so in order to add nee ones, we need to remove an old one.

Promoting to open up ataking itself may work, but only if it’s attached to a plan to protect the system.

Your post is laughable as the only ones who have the ability to vote for me are a group of validators who clearly are not “noobs” lmfao. They have more technical knowledge, in their pinky’s fingernail than tou, but continue living in a world where everyone buy you is one.


Actually your description of the validator node system is not quite correct.

Any number of validator nodes may join the network at any time, but only the top 130 nodes (by voting power - the amount of LUNC delegated to them, and/or self-staked) can propose and vote on adding new blocks to the blockchain (this process is described in detail here: Manage a validator — Terra Classic Docs documentation).

It is not necessary for an existing validator to leave the network for a new one to join, and @manuel_raimondi is correct that in theory it would be easy to add new validator nodes now with significantly higher voting power than the incumbents due to the extremely low price of LUNC (assuming the incumbents do not want to commit new money to purchasing LUNC in the market, to maintain their voting power, given their massive existing losses on LUNC due to the inflation).

The incumbents realised their roles were under threat due to the massive inflation of LUNC and value destruction created by the protocol leading up to the 13th May, which is why on 13th May they installed release v0.5.19 of terra-core (now called classic-core) which disabled staking and also prevents new validator nodes from joining the network, in order to preserve their positions of power.


There can only be 130 Active validators.In order to get into the top 130, yes another validator would need to be removed as the number cannot exceed 130 Active validators.

“The Terra core is powered by the Tendermint consensus. Validators run full nodes, participate in consensus by broadcasting votes, commit new blocks to the blockchain, and participate in governance of the blockchain. Validators can cast votes on behalf of their delegators. A validator’s voting power is weighted according to their total stake. The top 130 validators make up the Active Validator Set and are the only validators that sign blocks and receive revenue.”

Also see

Validator FAQ — Terra Docs documentation.


Another way to get a vote is to stake or delegate your tokens to a “good” validator. Some of the top validators do ask their delegates for voting instructions before voting.

Also we both said the same thing about if staking was restafted, how the current validators would likely need to buy more LUNC to maintain their position or risk loosing it to a new validator. I really don’t disagree there at all.

That was why I said the current validators are unlikley to vote on a plan based soley on restarting staking.

Do Kwon does not want that as he would have less control over the validators and governance would begin. Think about that. I was never defending not opening it up, I was explaining WHY it won’t happen.

1 Like

I disagree with your interpretation. Adding a new validator and achieving higher voting power than other active validators would cause it to move ahead of existing validators and become active. It does not require any of the existing active validators to leave the network for this to happen.


No, not leave the network lol, but become inactive.

Active Validators are the only validators that sign blocks and receive revenue as well as treasury governance by voting on governance proposals.

A validator’s voting influence is weighted according to their total stake. So this is another way that the current validators can loose their ranking so to speak even if they remain in the top 130. This affects their earnings as well, not just voting weight.

1 Like

Ok fair enough, then we just misunderstood each other.

I agree an existing validator will become inactive if a new one is added that achieves a higher voting power, and this is an automatic process controlled by the terra protocol.The existing validator that is made inactive has no choice in this matter (and will only become active again though a sufficiently large increase their voting power).

So, how can we make that staking is active again? What to do about this cause?

Basically we can do what @Deathstar_Daddy is doing already - trying to reach out to the validators and persuade them that staking should be re-enabled. I disagree that a vote should be required to do this, as a vote was never taken when the validators decided to disable staking in the first place.

As a result, the Terra Classic protocol currently does not function the was it is supposed to, as described in the official documentation, from a governance perspective, and it can be argued that the unilateral action validators took to disable it is breaking the implied contract on protocol operations with the Terra Classic community.

I believe that a litigation route might be possible on this point, having taken legal advice on this aspect, where a class-action lawsuit against the top 130 validators could be instigated to force them to restore the previous software version that operates according to the agreed governance rules of the Terra Classic protocol.

If Deathstar_Daddy fails in his attempt to reach a compromise with the validators, the legal route is probably what is left to the community. Validators will then have to decide if committing funds to fight such a lawsuit is worth it to maintain their control of the Terra Classic blockchain.