So why cannot new validators join? Or delegate? So a new community of lunac validators is created, with the lunac token pool?
1 Like
because there is a possibility of governance attacks, until that is dealt with i dont think new validators will be allowed to be created. nor delegating to current validators as attacker could delegate trillions etc which would again, be a governance attack
1 Like
The governance attack already happened - 375million Luna preventing 6.5 Trillion from voting by disabling delegations. The trillions you speak of were created by the existing holders interacting with the protocol. It is not the new holdersā fault this happened.
What you are describing is just the incumbents saying āwe donāt want to be outvoted by the new holders, who we know hold much more LUNC than usā. There is nothing preventing the incumbents increasing their voting power by purchasing LUNC in the market, but instead of doing this, they break the governance system so that new holders are totally disenfranchised and cannot vote.
12 Likes
Now that Luna 2.0 been launched we need to move on and focus an what we want to do next, Do Kwon and co left the ship, but itās up to us to rebuild something in the smartest way in a collective effort. No need to rush or to spam anyone, but we need to start a real dialog about what LUNC future.
4 Likes
This is precisely why I am now a validator on Luna 2.0
I bought post depeg and didnāt like that we couldnāt vote. So I want to make sure that retail investors have a validator that they can count on to have their backs. I created Moon Platoon to serve this purpose. I canāt do anything with Luna classic, but going forward I want to be able to vote for what is in the best interest of the retail investors and donate some luna to development while weāre at it. If you do make it over to Luna 2.0, just know that MP will have your back on proposals.
9 Likes
If we are successful in the future I hope you get the oppertunity to alao validate on the Classic ecosystem as well.
3 Likes
Perhaps best to talk to the abstainers and those that voted no to V2?
These voted NO w Veto
| Validator | Voting power | Contact |
|---|---|---|
| stake.systems | 4.03% | |
| DSRV | 2.87% | |
Allnodes.com  0% fee |
1.65% | |
| blockscape | 1.27% | |
| P2P.ORG - P2P Validator | 0.90% |
These abstained:
| Validator | Voting power | Contact |
|---|---|---|
| Orion.Money | 9.70% | |
| SmartStake | 4.04% | |
| Chorus One | 1.93% | |
| ChainLayer | 0.94% | |
| syncnode | 0.71% | |
| Terra World | 0.70% | |
| ā | ā | ā |
| Staking Fund | 0.68% | |
| danku_zone w/ DAIC | 0.67% | |
| RockX | 0.64% | |
| Luna Burner - shutting down by end of month | 0.60% | |
| wave | 0.60% | |
| ā | ā | ā |
| Luna Station 88 | 0.51% | |
| Marte Cloud | 0.37% | |
High Stakes  |
0.29% | |
| healings | 0.29% | |
| Stake5 Labs | 0.08% | |
| ā | ā | ā |
| Genesis Lab | 0.00% |
And another 50 did not vote.
8 Likes
Good call
Smart and good idea. I have tried reaching oit to 0rion already and a few others bt nice to have a comprehensive list.
Thanks for putting this together.
RIGHT , and also proper compensation for the people that ho bought during the 8th and 12 13th of may. Please
1 Like
The only way to get any real chance of recovery is for LUNC & USTC to come back. ALL hopes from TFL or Do Kwon to do right by us with his ew coin has all but faded to nothing.
We NEED to be able to write our future and rebuild. If get can do that then we have a decent chance imo. I wouldnāt of kept buying post attack if I did not believe this. I got my a drage way down and now just waiting like everyone else.
5 Likes
what do you mean with compensation ?
is lunc an insurance to pay for investment loss or is it a blockchain project which should get back up ?
Everyone wants compensation UST holders,Pre attack Luna holders etc ā¦
But they are doing NOTHING other than demanding compensation from new holders in RETURN for WHAT ?
2 Likes
luna v2 canāt really take off w.o. luna v1 being properly dealt with - it will always be there like a shadow. How can you trust the project if insiders run away at the first hint of difficulties and reneg on promises, leaving only despair behind? What is happening with luna v1 now is the best indication what will happen to luna v2, when problems ariseā¦
2 Likes
I do think there is a significant number of people that would stake with a new validator, or an existing one that has similar thoughts as we are discussing. When the minting went parabolic the supply exploded as we all know and they generally lost control of LUNA, but no one as yet has used the large ownerships at these low prices to pull back into the validators.
Donāt you think a case could be made where owners of now millions of LUNC potentially have more than holders prior to the massive supply explosion? Isnāt that where the voting power is? Why couldnāt a new or older validator propose that all newly staked LUNC will be used to vote a certain plan and that plan being one of the ideas we all seem to share. Not complicated, simply burn (via tax or fee or trade) to a certain future X supply where new or recent hodlers would have a say in the voting.
I think many would stake a large amount with a validator with this opinion.
Lead the way, many would follow I thinkā¦
2 Likes
Are you able to contact any of the validators at least who support community proposals?
Hi,
We are currently validating LUNC (we voted YES on prop 1623) happy to continue validating the chain as long as there is demand for it.
It is now your chain, you can do all the Tax & Burn proposals and the other crazy stuff I saw in the last few weeks.
TerraStation has āLuna Classicā option, so there is a governance processā¦ what you guys really need are core developersā¦ you may also want to start a discord for validators/usersā¦ you should find the (few) key validators that are āstrong believersā in LUNC, who will spend time and resources to go above and beyond.
7 Likes
Hi @mcf-rocks ,
Do you have that from TerraForm Labs, or is that an assumption?
If you have it from TerraForm Labs, it would be helpful for you to post that piece of communication (that will save a legal step)?
It appears to me that TerraForm Labs proposal 1623 and discussion, that there is no mention that TerraForm Labs would remove themselves from day-to-day operations of the āclassicā chain, only that they would remove their wallet from the airdrop - and the classic chain was always suppose to be a fully owned community chain. There is one document that I found that legally defined the community, even though it was meant for a sports deal, it acknowledged it as a legal trust entity with trustees and enforcer, and as the owner of certain intellectual property rights.
If you do have that piece of communication from TerraForm Labs, then it would leave us clear to pursue non-hard forking code changes, so that would be really helpful information if you could pass that along. You can also feel free to message me through this system as well, and I can share my email if you would like to send it along personally instead of through the discussion.
I hope you have a great day today 
1 Like
I have no idea what TFL will doā¦ probably they will do nothing.
I would also forget the legal stuff, this is an unregulated space, legal remedy can take years (see Tezos) ā can you quick boot the chain and get things going? Can it become something?
I think there is still life, but not for much longer perhaps.
Not financial advice, bla bla bla.
Do you know of any or if many of the developers are still interested in LUNC at this point? I would ASSUME but have no clue reallyā¦
2 Likes