USTC Incremental Repeg, Buybacks, Staking, Swaps

In this scheme, if there are accidents like death spiral again, will there be heavy losses on the side of the exchange? If the exchange can avoid such heavy losses, I believe no one can refuse

all good except that the concensus to be reached is somewhat out of the hands of the intimate LUNC community.

1 Like

Good idea. Vote YES

1 Like

Let’s allocate ustc to the treasury by purchasing automatic ustc with burning taxes. Burning doesn’t help the lunc price. It’s been a year. The price is where it started. After the Terra fiasco, we want a CEO with a reassuring real photo.


Chains governance is the one to tell you that if all succeeds. Welcome to Terra Classic.

Yet, nobody is telling you to buy. You are not forced.
Yet, you aren’t entitled to choose your preffered price at will either. You aren’t somehow special to dictate at it at will.

Most of your complaints fall into a single question: Do you know what is the point of having a stable currency?
Seems you are nixing volatile speculative asset trading with a stable currency.


Amazing broo go we are with with you put this proposal for voting amazing yes yes yes

1 Like

Repeg will happen Penny by penny or directly hard peg.

I like this approach. Very simple. Not too difficult to implement and a low risk approach. When can we start? Please put it up for voting

1 Like

This here tells you that there will be future proposals IF conditions are met.
All your fussing over do we have L1 team, who is it, what will it cost and so forth will need to wait for the actual proposals that handle the minute details that you need Ed or someone to walk you through the details if they are still left unclear.

This is a signalling proposal - Yes, we should seek this avenue or no.
Minute details and micromanaging (your forte) are left up to Governance.

*Ed left for AI side chain.

Read it twice and dyor.


@ek826 can you please provide your comments on this proposal?

response again.

out of all 3 scenarios which one would be most achieveable?

Out of the three scenarios, the most achievable one would be Scenario 1, where the market price is below the peg price. This is because it is more likely that the market price will fall below the peg price, especially during periods of market instability or bearish sentiment. In this scenario, the protocol would be able to sell USTC at a premium to the market price, which could potentially generate revenue for the protocol and provide an incentive for market participants to help bring the price back up to the peg. However, it’s important to note that the success of any algorithm or protocol is dependent on various factors, including market conditions, user adoption, and overall demand for the asset.

1 Like



Can we actually believe any CEX will help with a project that is still facing possible charges from different authorities around the globe?

Don’t get me wrong. I like and support the idea! And I do believe doing something is better as nothing.

Personally I believe burning all stables in oracle pool and putting 100% tax on stables rewards would be first step. Also there needs to be a max cap for ustc. Like max 5b ustc supply.

1 Like

USTC can be a coin with a floating rate - like the euro against the dollar.
Only sellers can pay a higher commission than buyers.
This seller’s commission can be 2 to 10 times higher than the buyer’s commission.

Of course, this is better than Duncan’s plan.
But for this we need real volumes to buy, for this we must create a deficit USTC and its utility, profitability first. Without - waste of time, just volumes will drop to 0 - no one will buy or sell.

@RedlineDrifter just start with USTC staking.


I guess you haven’t heard of Binance.

1 Like

I believe there are many who want to buy a dollar for two cents

1 Like

Binance will never support this. This illegal.
Well, even if plan were implemented, the result is 0 buyers plus 0 sellers (because both variants are unprofitable). Or maybe let’s take 90% commission from any USTC or LUNC seller? This will solve the problem and quckly, right? Lol, no.

LUNC a potential 10000x, just we need buyers for trillions.


That’s a lot to digest, but it seems to me to be very well thought out !
I’m out of my depth to comment on the mechanisms of the proposal, I’ll have to reread it again, but it seems cautious enough, well, for a repeg plan that is, and it is very honest of you to outline the negatives of such a plan !

And I agree with Tonu here :

In any case, we will have to see what the CEXs think of such a plan ! If they do not, as @k0de has said, would it be feasible to implement this on chain on DEXs, and would that make sense to try this repeg plan ?

I’ll be voting yes… maybe after rereading a few times !


UPD To make a tax for the wallets of scammers (TFL) - Drifter was against it. Now agree, but not for scammers, for people who have lost 98% and new investors.