There will be much less transactions with a 5% transaction fee.
0.1% seems like a palatable number that wouldn’t cause much of a dip in number of transactions and still generate a lot of revenue.
si te informas sobre el protocolo antes de hacerlo, en particular este, si se considera inversión.
I agree. Burn should happen by charging a tax, but 3% may scare investors.
1 Like
I DISAGREE.
I see no fraud.
For legality, first, code is law.
If you purchased any Terra currency, you agreed to an algorithm with hyperinflation that was hard coded. What made the coins worthless were a combination of social and algorithmic factors.
The algorithm is undoubtedly idiotic, as it moved to mindless hyperinflation. But that’s what you agreed to by using the product, so it’s the algorithm and community that creates the value, NOT the team’s decision to fork or not. The damage is done, and to the best of my knowledge, there’s now way to return to the time before the attack on the current chain.
The complexit comes from the transactions that occurred after the crash. Let’s not forget the toxic transactions happening now on mass, with newcomers scooping up hyper-inflated LUNA and actively advocating deflation.
Sorry to be a bit ad hominem, but those people are predatory, lobbying to have their low-cost mega LUNA bag deflated, making them profit, leaving the victims uncompensated.
Since LUNA now has a tainted chain full of these toxic predator transactions, the only option is to cut the chain, and fork to a new chain built on an ethical distribution of the funds.
The fork is an attempt to put the money in the victims’ hands, NOT newcomers hoping to steal their compensation.
Terra has every right to build a new project as it likes. Ethereum classic is the same as Luna classic. It was an undesirable fork made for ethical reasons.
In fact, the Terra foundation could use Etherium classic as a historical president. It sets a norm. So legally, it’s hard to accuse the Foundation of fraud when Etherium already did the same thing, under losely comparable circumstances.
The current blockchain cannot be reversed. It’s full of toxic transactions that would give too much profit to newcomers, leaving the victims nowhere close to being compensated.
The fork is an attempt at a just solution.
That’s not what I call fraud.
I’m not in the inner circle, and I may be wrong. But, I don’t see any fraud.
Instead, I see transparency and ethics in the Terra Foundation.
The only potential legal violation I see is negligence. After Iron Finance, you’d think that every similar project would have had data scientists simulating everything that could go wrong, and develop solid crisis response abilities. Terra failed. So perhaps they’re neglegent.
Attempting to act in the interest of victims after you mess up IS NOT A CRIME.
There will be winners and losers. There is no perfect solution.
If there is a fraud, you need to put forward a legal case for it.
Fraud is a legal concept, but your argument lacks evidence and anything that shows an attempt at profiting from others.
I’m no legal expert, but for fraud to be present, I understand Terra insiders would have to profit at the expense of others, through some level of deception.
But with the fork, the LFG is giving money to victims. How is that fraud? That’s heroic. That’s acting in the interest of others.
This is not a fraud.
Fraud is YouTubers buying up cheap LUNA and launching campaigns to sway the voting toward deflation, so they profit at the expense of the actual victims.
As I see it, the fork is to compensate victims and exclude the predators.
Let the newcomer have compensation in the new chain, and leave the predators where they belong, on the old chain.
I vote for the fork.
1 Like
Garanto aqui meu lugar 
I agree, but I wouldn’t go as far as saying there have been “transparency and ethics” in Terra.
They had the power to stop the blockchain and the minting whenever they wanted. Instead, they suddenly let it mint 7 trillions in under 5 minutes to no use, when there was no hope already.
I’m not on the inside, so I’m only judging as an outsider.
I totally agree with you on that point.
I think they were incompetent, and the hyper-inflation was beyond comprehension.
I think they acted with good intentions, but they were incompetent.
I see the team more like honest fools. At least they admitted fault and promised to improve, so there’s hope for the team.
1 Like
Pues en mi país fraude no es necesariamente engañar ,pero si una empresa no cumple con los controles de seguridad y un deficiente control de personal que provoque pérdidas a sus derechoambientes o en nuestro caso inversores, ya es considerado fraude por el mal manejo ,aun no siendo intencional,
1 Like
Good post.
Burning with a tax on buy and sales is the only way I feel that any value will return. Someone mentioned this days ago in a thread.
Forking will bring no value, I as many will, are just going to sell what little is recieved back as I no longer trust DO and this fork idea seems like just a prolonged 
spiral.
If most sell the so called Luna 2, its value will end up just as bad as Luna 1.
Burning with a transaction tax on Luna over a long period to weasil out get rich quick traders with insentives for staking holding Luna is the only real way this ever gets back to any type of value for holders before depeg.
They could annouce this and close trading and allow only pre-depeg holders the ability to buy more Luna - UST etc with a one time purchase to increase their holdings at a low like now. They could then commence the trading burn to start lowering the amount of tokens.
They should have never of allowed trading to continue and have had everything already in place for something like this to occur, a company worth billions upon billions run by people with lawyers sat at board decisions would have this all covered.
The fork as mentioned brings nothing to the table in value and like this thread mentions, if they left people trading a token, then they are commiting fraud on the biggest crypto sc am ever.
Exchanges & other Token CEO’s need to change DO’s forking idea and his mind or he needs removing from Terra before he collapses the whole Cryptoverse and makes it all Regulated for governments to Tax every part of it all, if it survives of course.
Is DO’s Ego about to ruin the trust of all Institutional Investors with a no value fork ?
Are we witnessing the DeFi death we all love ?
2 Likes
Missing $btc traced. Blockchain doesn’t lie!!!
This will help them - blockchains don’t lie!!
This will help them - blockchains don’t lie!!
Now we know the rush to move to version 2.0
2 Likes
No clear answer yet:
What to do with $UST held in Terra Station Wallet, then moved off-chain, now still holding off chain.
Transfer back into native Terra station wallet?
Those who held $UST in Terra Wallet, then bridged to another chain during the days of the collapse and are still holding $UST now off chain would get left out of one or the other pre-depeg or post-depeg snapshots.
It is important to get this info out to $UST holders.
In conclusion the question is, should UST holders who transferred UST to another chain during/after the de-peg transfer their UST back into Terra native wallet now before a launch snapshot?
IMO
What happen to LUNA and UST was obviously an inside job and planned.
- Luna bought BTC as a reserve. Billions in USD
- BTC getting dumped for weeks (April - May).
- UST got depeg
- Do posting increasing the capital to defend and repeg UST
- Do keep posting to hold on tight (LUNA & UST holders)
- Luna price dropped to $30
- Do propose an idea which can lead Luna to ZERO (Spiral death)
IN THIS MOMENT THEY SHOULD INFORM CEX TO CEASE THE TRADING FOR UST AND LUNA
Too many lost their trust in other coins and most coins DROP 50% on that day! - Luna Supply Reach 5B and price drop < $1
- Luna price went to ZERO
- UST proposal failed and now price went to < .10
I’ve seen too many lost their lives as well.
Do wants everyone to get poor.
Now he had made it successfully!
Until now there’s no public appology from him.
The one thing you should shame is you name your daughter ‘LUNA’
You made her a victim from your invention for the rest of her life.
5 Likes
yes very good
I am in the same situation and I don’t know what to do. There are no answers anywhere!!
Except they blocked stake and are in control of the vote, blocking out 90% of the coins from having a fair say. Its a money grab and not anywhere near a real reflection of the community. The total staked as per his contract is “376.71M” but there are over 6.5 TRILLION Luna in circulation, the vote is shameful to even call it community supported.
2 Likes
UST holders are going to get 10 cents on the dollar if that, I wouldn’t exactly call that compensation.
Most people are up a lot on LUNA investments but down a lot more on UST…
There is a lack of transparency, a hurry to move forward without adequate deliberation, going with a proposal that 90% of the people on here don’t want.
Conman has ruined my (and countless others) life with this fraud.
1 Like
You’re correct. But…
It’s necessary for them to block newcomers.
How can loyal members who’ve been there since the beginning be outvoted by someone who purchased hyper-inflated luna yesterday?
They specifically block the exact exploitation you are lobbying for. Why, because it’s what they called a governance attack. Newcomers buy hyper inflated LUNA, hijack the network, and then push it to server their greedy self interest.
With their defensive protection, at least the vote is being carried out by the old guard, immune from newcomers whose motives are hard to predict.
It’s not shameful. It’s a necessity.
If they didn’t do this, newcomers would buy up hyper-inflated luna, hijack the network, and vote to deflate it, to enrich themselves and impoverish those who lost the most.
Allowing that to happen would be shameful. Blocking this risk is a practical necessity, to patch up an easily exploited governance loophole the hyperinflation created.
1 Like
And forget to mention the billions defending the peg seems to be utter BS. Fraud. The bitcoin backing gave people a sense of security investing in UST and LUNA. He falsely mentioned on his twitter bio area that UST was backed by 9 billion in BTC and he erased it. This is all indefensible.
1 Like
Wasn’t used to defend the peg - blockchain doesn’t lie. https://www.reddit.com/r/terraluna/comments/us4v5m/the_rabbithole_that_lead_to_do_kwons_missing/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
1 Like
But the vote is still a sham. Do Kwon and the validators are colluding against the will of the people.
1 Like