[Unpopular Opinion] Large investors won't pour money into a socialist ecosystem that prioritizes small wallets

To begin with, I do appreciate all the proposals even though I strongly disagree with some of them. The decisions we take at this crucial moment will determine the path the project will take, so it’s important to understand pros and cons of socialist vs. capitalist approaches.

Right now the ecosystem needs capital which can come from either millions of retail investors or a few whales (VCs, crypto OGs, etc.). There is also a possibility of a merge with a competing project/platform, but chances are very low giving LUNA’s market cap and the amount of bad debt in the ecosystem. The capital can be used for the fork, or buy-and-burn, or any variation of the above.

We implement FatMan’s proposal to make the supermajority of the UST holders whole up to a maximum of UST 50,000 per wallet snapshotted at the time of the attack.

There are many proposals to distribute funds to small wallets up to a certain cap. There is nothing wrong with being socialists, but then don’t expect to raise funds from capitalists.

Why would large funds invest in the project that literally creates a precedent of screwing up large investors? So the next time the angry mob can screw them up? Large investors are smart money, don’t treat them as stupid if you want them to save your project with their money.

Also please don’t call it a ‘fair’ distribution. There is nothing fair in discriminating against people based on the amount of money they have invested in the project. Additionally, many of these large wallets belong not to rich oligarchs with now-confiscated yachts, but rather to companies that manage funds, including, you guessed it, funds of ‘poor’ people. For example, the vast majority of LUNA and UST trading volume comes from centralized exchanges, which usually use just a handful of addresses.

In other words, a compensation that prioritizes small wallets will reimburse certain people at the expense of other people, some of whom are richer, while others are even poorer than those who will be reimbursed.

Of course, if there will be no new funds raised and the only compensation will come from the Luna Foundation Guard’s remaining reserves of just $80 million, then giving that to small wallets would make some sense, because otherwise everybody will get less than 1% of their pre-attack holdings. Ideally, I would still give people a choice to claim 1% or to donate airdropped funds to the pool that will be used for the second airdrop for smaller wallets a few months later. People should see ‘Claim’ and ‘Donate’ buttons on the website and make their own choice.

Socialist Meme Coin

If the community will shift towards a socialist approach and prioritize small wallets in the reimbursement plan, then it would make more sense to turn LUNA into another meme coin and try to raise capital from millions of retail investors, many of whom don’t even realize that the total supply has been diluted to trillions of tokens.

After that the community can try to shrink LUNA supply with various burn methods and either reimburse UST holders or restore the peg.

We can choose a capitalist path based on consent, or a socialist path based on coercion.


Please read and repost this article, link spaced to avoid post issue.



This for me is just the last nail on the coffin, trying all to look nice as saviors of the poor.

Their first measure was bailing out the big investors exchanging 1:1 BTC with UST.

Now, without money and only 90 M, “let’s look to the small wallets”

Is done, finito. We are in denial phase. Nobody will trust Luna again.

I agree 100% with this post

If Luna wanna survive they have to keep working on this L1 and keep innovating, if they wanna compensate those UST holders they also have to keep working on this project,

“Here is what we have we are gonna compensate the small holders first” = “Take everything we have we are gonna close bye bye”

Primero, no sé para qué metes aquí el socialismo y al capitalismo.
Lo segundo, el otro día, LUNA tenía una capitalización de 3B$ y hoy es de menos de la mitad y sabes porqué? Porque los “capitalistas” como tú dices, quieren quedarse con todo el fondo.
El mercado ha hablado y está hablando, quiere a LUNA, pero no quiere a UST.

valuable input, +vote, at the end of the day tokenOwnership/stake should allow CHOICE! if you bought before, after, or during, you should have a say in the direction. i am in favor of allowing “claim” or “donate” as you say

as far as this go I do somewhat disagree. The discrimination is not based on “amount of money they have invested” but rather the risk that they were willing to take on this asset. $LUNA holders are and should be aware of the risk that are associated with holding that coin. $UST holders … while perhaps responsible for the bank-run/death spiral … bought into this project for stability, and this has to be honored FIRST before any confidence in the success of this ecosystem can be reinstalled.

just my two cents though, take care :slight_smile:

1 Like

Fully agree with your view, although I probably don’t qualify to be a whale. Also, as you said, IMO you need the project alive to keep getting revenue rather than killing the goose that lays the golden egg, but I guess people have different views.
Anyhow, the project is now probably lost and I’m not sure how TFL/LFG/DK is going to really ‘compensate’ anyone and what’s going to happen to anyone. This is becoming a very large issue in Korea so I’m guessing that there’s going to be some consequence to DK.

At this point, I somewhat agree with you, if nothing works… we can re-design the Luna icon into a soviet icon (not sure what you call it in English lol) with that scythe and hammer and keep this going, as long as there are validators who will run the nodes :sweat_smile:

We should continue discussing the future of Luna, but I think the developers have something in mind… :slightly_frowning_face: