16 May 2022
OG
17:36
One GAIA
In reply to this message
it already has unfortunately.
T
17:51
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
agreed
OG
18:09
One GAIA
In reply to this message
who runs this group? no such thing as too much transparency, especially at this time
SR
18:36
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Nexus team together with other people (not sure who).
18:36
https://meet.google.com/ini-zfhb-muz
Meeting between founders & validators atm, Feel free to join.
TU
18:38
The User
I dropping this here but if you guys need on devs or else, let me know, I can forward resources and I have few available local nodes if needed for anything
n
19:29
n3mo
In reply to this message
gm mewny, nice having you here
19:29
have some thoughts and will try pen down. happy to chat separately if more efficient
19:30
In reply to this message
speed is intentional — of the essence to prevent dev, validator and ecosystem churn
T
19:31
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
group of builders. Nexus, Prism, WhiteWhale, Angel Protocol + others
DK
20:05
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
How about we just double the dev alloc
TB
20:06
THORchain BULL
That was my suggestion.
V
20:08
Vini
In reply to this message
That would be good! The more we can protect devs and projects, the better. Doubling sounds about right to me.
T
20:09
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
any logic for that?
20:11
I think we are gonna put some pen to paper actually. Feels like there are a couple pieces we'd like to tweak .

I can't speak to all the details right now, but allo for builders, whale cap, distro to post crash stakeholders, and lock up periods seem to be things where we would like to see changes on
DK
20:12
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
What should we cut?
T
20:13
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
728×341, 43.1 KB
TB
20:13
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
A bit less community allocation for $ust / $luna

The devs are the value creators, the pie gets bigger and everyone ends up with more value
T
20:13
Tundra V1
These parts seem to be the things that the builders are calling out as issues. This piece should be very small according to some
JZ
20:13
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
UST holders 🗡
TB
20:13
THORchain BULL
Not a 0 sum game
JZ
20:14
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
Y'all have to make a decision. Make the builders happy or make the UST (debt) holders happy
V
20:14
Vini
In reply to this message
+1 to builders
T
20:14
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
not much of a choice tbh
JZ
20:14
Jack Zampolin
anywhere in between is a losing proposition
20:14
In reply to this message
I agree
SV
20:15
Sergey Vasylchuk
In reply to this message
Communism 2.0?
TU
20:15
The User
What is qualified as an essential dev?
JZ
20:16
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
This isn’t communism it’s smart business. Defaulting on debt is an age old tactic
T
20:16
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
builders are gonna work on a proposed framework for distribution. Think it might be some combo of TVL, MC, # of users
TB
20:16
THORchain BULL
No. Some of these people will want this project to succeed guys. The ust community is not a drag, community adds value to project.

It’s a huge community of 100 000s of holders. 1000s will stick around and end ip adding value
SV
20:16
Sergey Vasylchuk
I remember crash of EOS , give a power to devs and let’s cut off whales.

Investors gone
T
20:17
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
to be clear, not cut off whales. Just limit them in new structure
20:17
also, do not think thats a fair comparison considering the level of technical talent & traction we had in the builder community here vs there
TU
20:17
The User
In reply to this message
Gotcha.
TB
20:18
THORchain BULL
Every single group is important there.
I wouldn’t cut off whales either, I’d just distribute as it was. There’s not a single big L1 without whales / vc funds.
T
20:18
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
whale cap seems to make sense and is gathering consensus. People dont want the same ownership structure on the new chain I think
JZ
20:18
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
Cosmos but I don’t think y’all like that example.
TU
20:19
The User
In reply to this message
I fear that the endgame will bring the same distribution where paper hand will eventually dump for whales hands
n
20:19
n3mo
In reply to this message
Another angle to make UST holders whole — sell discounted bonds that can be reclaimed at par + % interest say a year from now (this assumes there’ll be a new stabelcoin in new terra network)

This has the outcome of raising capital too. While giving UST holders upside to regain their principal with a small down payment. Yet allows new chain to focus on builder sustainability. Nice balance of reinstating debt + raising capital + builder focus.

This is how governments bail out economic crises btw. Issue discounted t-bonds and market to central bank and instis.
TU
20:20
The User
Many whales invested couple hundred of thousands since depeg. In a somewhat selfish way you’ll say, but they did where others just jump off and sold, if we could purchase that low, its because many decided to paperhand at some point.

I agree builder should have more. But I don’t think it should be at the « whales » detriment
T
20:21
Tundra V1
brb gonna be back later, going to work on the builder counter a bit
SV
20:21
Sergey Vasylchuk
Just don’t try to prioritize some group for now , losing piece of participants will lead to misbalance.
T
20:21
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
whales detriment, no not the way to look at it I think
TU
20:21
The User
In reply to this message
This is not a bad idea, that being said, UST is planning to be retired ahah
SV
20:21
Sergey Vasylchuk
In reply to this message
I’m on dev part , just FYI
T
20:22
Tundra V1
brb l8er
n
20:22
n3mo
In reply to this message
Then issue bonds on new Luna token if need be. Not a fan of that (would prefer par value bonds) but worst case gives room for consideration for UST holders
TU
20:24
The User
In reply to this message
Could it be a « USD » valued bonds, transferable in LUNA value at coupon payment date or terms ?
FJ
20:26
Frank Jia
I love the fact that we are focusing on empowering devs. Are there any plans to bring some sort of stable to Terra, whether it's terra native or encouraging bridging of other stables like USDC? A lot of crypto is centered around defi (which stables are a core of)
V
20:32
Vini
In reply to this message
yes man, USDC/USDT via WH
20:32
its in the agora btw
DK
20:33
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Working on it
0base.vc invited Ryan Jang
OG
20:39
One GAIA
In reply to this message
+1
Ryan Jang invited BC Chang
TB
20:41
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
Poor people always vote for high taxes on the rich. It’s a popular policy. The rich go somewhere else or have tax evasion strategy. It leads to brain drains etc

If you exclude whales, whales will exclude themselves in the future.
C|
20:41
Caleb L. Power | AxB | D₀ | MD
Oo
T
20:42
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
dont wanna exclude whales, just limit their ownership of the network relative to what it was before. A slight power lvl adjustment is called for I think
20:42
In reply to this message
^
TB
20:43
THORchain BULL
Just my 2 cents, I like free market principles. Whales create more value in an ecosystem.

I won’t bring that back again.

People will always vote themselves more alloc. Is it really fair to the guys who had the most skin in the game? They had the most risks.

Jump and Binance didn’t dump. They were one of the biggest net positive for the ecosystem.

Food for thought.
TU
20:44
The User
In reply to this message
+1
TB
20:45
THORchain BULL
Terra was a whale tank.
TU
20:45
The User
In reply to this message
What I fear the most is paperhand at the hand, removing from whale hands for quick-profit-hands. But anyway, here is not the fight
T
20:45
Tundra V1
Some notes from our builder group convo:

"People don't want a VC chain - all UST pre Attack and LUNA pre Attack should have a "whale cap" to even out the ownership of this new chain, not setting it up to be massively controlled VC chain from the beginning. Protocol Treasuries should be excluded from this whale cap."
TB
20:46
THORchain BULL
I think this is shortsighted. The restart of this bull run will come from VCs not retail.
T
20:46
Tundra V1
I will share all of your feedback
20:46
i think it is valuable
20:47
and i am not discrediting it
TB
20:47
THORchain BULL
Jump just lost 2b protecting the peg. Why should they be penalized when they’re the hero of this story
T
20:48
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
to be clear - we do not know what they did. There has been no audit on the activities of Jump, for all we know they open a big short as they knew the price of the assets were collapsing
20:48
would be a stretch to call anyone a hero right now
20:48
especially anyone who was in the war room in the critical moments
TB
20:48
THORchain BULL
Right
DK
20:49
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Station is shipping with launch
TB
20:49
THORchain BULL
Amazing. Will it support both chains?
P
20:56
PFC
In reply to this message
don't see why it wouldn't .. it can already support mainnet/bombay/add-your own
DK
21:03
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Yes
TB
21:04
THORchain BULL
Is there a name for the new chain / token?
DK
21:05
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Name seems less important
21:05
The name terra came bc i happened to be playing lots of sc back in the day
21:06
The earth moon thing came later
TB
21:06
THORchain BULL
I like Remi’s suggestion

Terra Nova
Could be $nova or $terra
21:09
Interestingly the first chain has meme coin supply with solid infra and smart contract capabilities.

If Elon is right it will become money lol
21:09
It will be interesting to see what happens there
Vini invited Lumiere | spec.finance (won't DM, won't ask your 12 seeds)
V
21:11
Vini
Welcome @spectrum_lumiere ! spec.finance in da house !
L
21:11
Lumiere | spec.finance (won't DM, won't ask your 12 seeds)
👋
DK
21:11
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
U in sers?
L
21:13
Lumiere | spec.finance (won't DM, won't ask your 12 seeds)
We are always in, and would like to learn more details also.
Vini pinned this message
B-
21:20
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
569×280, 43.5 KB
someone in my group says
DK
21:20
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Declare support on Twitter for the fork and we will add you to the list
B-
21:21
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
same goes for smart stake for analytics/validator dashboards? 🤷‍♂️
DK
21:21
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Sure!
21:21
In reply to this message
Noted. Lesser of all evils though
Lumiere | spec.finance (won't DM, won't ask your 12 seeds) invited hikari042 (won't DM or ask 24 seeds)
Vini invited Spectrum Rhealward (won't DM you first, won't ask seed/private key)
B-
21:35
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
Done.
Smart Stake has built several analytics dashboards for Terra in last 18 months and "commits to continue building dashboards on the forked chain" to educate community, provide visualizations for various aspects, build validator & network performance tools and increase transparency

https://twitter.com/SmartStake/status/1526389648775335938
Edwin invited Jon Ong
B-
21:49
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
@dokwon some of the community validators have repeatedly spoken about how several of the validators are what's called zombie validators. i guess doing any subjective equalized distribution is difficult given the tight timelines ....

but then i realized that some of the validators actually charge 100% commission. I wonder if this will lead to many validators setting high commission rates and milk the system because of the uniform distribution. it may be better to atleast include commission as an input in the uniform allocations (or perhaps limit to x% commission)
P
21:50
PFC
Ru referring to angel?
I'm not sure who else is on 100%
B-
21:50
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
flipside
21:50
mc1 or bc1
P
21:50
PFC
Mc/bc is new
B-
21:51
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
but what is stopping you or i from going to 100% or 50%
21:51
or 50%+
P
21:51
PFC
Lol.. mine has a max commission of 5% but I assume we could limit it
OG
21:51
One GAIA
In reply to this message
ok, but maybe that only starts counting above 10%? downward pressure on validator commission makes it unfeasible for smaller guys like us to keep proper infra profitably.

we've seen the 0% fee wars before.
P
21:51
PFC
Or redelegate after ?
OG
21:53
One GAIA
Unrelated to the current discussion:

this is very well done, and a new take on the whole thing, which at least I had not seen before: https://twitter.com/gametheorizing/status/1526373843908153345
B-
21:53
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
not against 10% commission. just saying if commission is not a factor, you will see a race to 100%. i dont think everyone will redelegate quickly
OG
21:53
One GAIA
In reply to this message
agreed
P
21:54
PFC
Could weight allocation based on max commission settings of validator
B-
21:54
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
100%
OG
21:55
One GAIA
In reply to this message
that isn't fair, because that parameter is immutable and ours was set very very high, back in 2018
P
21:55
PFC
In reply to this message
This is for the gentx.. it'll be a new node
OG
21:55
One GAIA
In reply to this message
oh ok!
V
21:56
Vini
In reply to this message
max_daily_change
OG
21:56
One GAIA
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
717×574, 26.1 KB
vals charging above 10%
21:56
In reply to this message
yep, we have that at 1%
V
21:56
Vini
In reply to this message
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1159×1280, 65.5 KB
like
21:57
meaning, i can jumo 1% until i reach the max of 20%
21:57
this is immutable once you set up
P
21:57
PFC
Right.. were talking about the 'max'
B-
21:58
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
max daily change aint that helpful for this. staking is long term game n many wont redelegate. max daily commission is good. most projects that do this kind of delegation use a max %. e.g. TDP had 10% cap. Angel is a special one obviously
V
21:58
Vini
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1210×490, 23.8 KB
some can go to 100% in a day
TB
21:59
THORchain BULL
You guys think the original chain will die? I bet it’s a $1b+ chain.

I’m going to validate both
P
21:59
PFC
In reply to this message
Right.
And I'm saying they should get less allocation (the max amount not the daily change)
B-
22:00
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
i will be on both chains as long as there is a practical reason to keep it up
P
22:00
PFC
In reply to this message
Same
V
22:00
Vini
In reply to this message
i agree, we should define default validators paramaters across the set on the new chain
22:00
In reply to this message
same
HyunCheol Park | Mosaic invited Park Jooyoung
Z(
22:08
Zak| EZStaking.io (Will never DM you first)
In reply to this message
which list?
CS
22:13
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
In reply to this message
Done 💪
DK
22:48
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
how about only validators with max 10% commission will be delegated to at genesis
22:49
In reply to this message
lmk when
B-
22:49
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
that is reasonable imo. also ok with bit here and there in terms of the exact value.
A
22:49
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Please add us to the list, we advertised our support on Twitter
DK
22:49
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
ok
DK
22:50
Do Kwon 🌖
@terran_2 can you keep track of validators that will be coming back?
OG
22:50
One GAIA
In reply to this message
Looking forward to announcing it, but how are ppl going to know which chain are we reffering to given the multiple proposals?
DK
22:53
David Koh
In reply to this message
Not sure why it needs to be max 10%. Ideallty it's just people who are at 10% currently. The max % is something validators have set long ago and won't even be able to change it now.
J
22:53
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
yes. Have a list going now.

Folks, if you plan to validate on the new chain please send me a DM so I can get a tally going.
We are working on the details of how in the next couple days. When we have them settled we will instruct on how to create, and then collect gentx.
22:54
In reply to this message
Mr. K you are on the list. 🙂
C|
22:54
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
We will support it too :)
P
22:54
PFC
In reply to this message
I tweeted support a while back
OG
22:54
One GAIA
In reply to this message
TB
22:55
THORchain BULL
@terran_2 am in too
J
22:55
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
excellent ty!
S
22:55
Shupcode
@terran_2 (samwise | Galactic Lounge) here we will be willing to help validate in both the old/new
J
22:55
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
gotcha
M
22:55
Michael Ng
In reply to this message
Dm-ed, stakewith.us will be validating on both chains too.
J
22:55
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
got it down
22:56
In reply to this message
got it
P
22:56
PFC
DM'd
J
22:56
Jared | TFL
man I wish emoji reactions were enabled in here
M
22:56
Mr.K
In reply to this message
Thanks!
J
22:56
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
got it!
B-
22:58
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
can someone enable emoji's/reactions?
22:58
In reply to this message
pls add me too
w
22:58
w
Terrans - can you fwd to Telegram and Discord groups you are a part of with active builders? We are collecting info of projects we can best help onboard to the new network.

---

Hi all, during these difficult times we'd like to get a pulse for how you are approaching the next few months so we can be most helpful. We know you've been reached out from multiple angles, having a central place with your contact info and needs will help us coordinate with you as best we can.

Please fill out the attached form with your details to support the new network launch.

https://forms.gle/ixrqMt6YrUKhkYJM7
J
22:59
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
happy to have you ser, recorded
X
23:00
Xian | Coinhall
dm-ed! @terran_2
J
23:00
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
got it, got you in
M
23:01
Mr.K
In reply to this message
How about setting the default commission settings all the same to 10% and making sure they don't change? It looks like we can get rid of commission competition.
DK
23:02
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
i think just insisting that all validators set a max_commission of 0.1 should be enough
23:02
over time people should be able to charge higher comission etc
23:02
esp if they dont want other people delegating
TB
23:06
THORchain BULL
When are we re enabling delegation on the original chain?
J
23:07
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
Up to the group.

Personal thought: post fork
DK
23:09
Do Kwon 🌖
I agree
B-
23:10
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
i dont think it should be done till the fork ... i could be wrong but it feels like there is a tsunami of meme coin hunters that have invaded ... i have never seen most of them before ... all just chanting burn tx fees and dont fork ... they dont appear to be the lunatics we had ... and they likely all have millions luna picked in few dollars
T
23:13
Tundra V1
You're moving forward without getting clear alignment from builders
23:13
this is a big mistake imo
B-
23:18
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
What is the relation between TBA and the discord rebuilders group? Or are you different?
T
23:18
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
different
DK
23:18
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
I thought you were setting up a call for us?
C
23:19
Chee How
In reply to this message
@terran_2, I've DM'ed you.
MA
23:20
Marius Abalaru
Hey guys. Any idea what will happen with the Osmosis UST?
T
23:20
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
I thought you were going to wait to talk to us before asking people to push out more comms. I'm trying to organize a call now, this is sensitive at this point.
DK
23:21
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
I'm just doing RTs
23:21
Not sure what I did wrong to offend
0base.vc invited J | WeStaking
T
23:23
Tundra V1
This whole thing is moving too fast, and builders are not aligned with the current allo / distribution. If you're gonna ask more people to RT the current proposal, or voice their support without gaining better alignment w core group of current builders then Im not sure what we're doing
CC
23:26
Calin Chitu
In reply to this message
Kytzu supports the fork too, I will post on twitter also
V
23:31
Vasiliy
Lido will run gov discussion + vote re: supporting the fork. No immediate position for us
j|
23:34
jiyun | DSRV
dsrv also no position. cuz there is no officiall governance. but still support only lunatics not tfl
H
23:34
HyunCheol Park | Mosaic
@terran_2 I've DM'ed you.
J
23:34
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
gotcha
23:34
In reply to this message
gotcha
BA
23:35
Bogdan A.
Will you accept new validators for terra2? Let pe know if I can apply.
DK
23:36
Do Kwon 🌖
sounds reasonable @terran_2 >?
B-
23:37
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
I am in support of a whale cap or a tapering mechanism. All for builders too but not at any significant expense of luna or ust holders (ideally pre depeg)
J
23:37
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
agreed. We will need backups. Keeping a list of them as well.
23:37
In reply to this message
plz DM
DK
23:39
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
i think
23:39
ust and marginal luna side needs whale caps
23:39
rumors of massive buyers
23:39
but hard to verify bc most of that supply is in exchanges
B-
23:40
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
There's an army of them responding on every tweet and every forum
DK
23:40
Do Kwon 🌖
but with the original luna portion everyone is already massivley diluted from their portion & largest whale (TFL) is being blacklisted so i think we should refrain from more cuts
23:40
In reply to this message
army of whales?
B-
23:40
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
Traders... Probably some whales too
DK
23:43
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
well luckily theres so much UST out there that i dont think its possible for anyone in that category to own too much
23:43
same with luna
J
23:47
Jared | TFL
36 validators already signed up. in only 56 minutes.
love it.
Keep it coming 🙂
P
23:47
PFC
In reply to this message
So if you don't get 130 are you opening it up to others?
23:48
Or just give original set more of a position?
D
23:48
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
Where do we sign up
V
23:49
Vlad
In reply to this message
^
J
23:51
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
Right here!
You in?
Cm
23:52
Cory moonshot
Sent DM @terran_2. Will validate whatever fork proposal passes governance
D
23:52
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
Yes DMd you too
J
23:52
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
got it!
C
23:58
CalvinCrypto (Never DM first)
DMed @terran_2, RockX will validate the new chain, please make it happen! 💪
17 May 2022
J
00:00
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
excellent!
Z(
00:03
Zak| EZStaking.io (Will never DM you first)
In reply to this message
hi jared, DM sent
J
00:08
James Parillo
In reply to this message
Same for figment- no position at this time but will review once a governance proposal is submitted
A
00:16
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Hey Jared, I have sent you the DM.
00:16
We will validate on the new chain
J
00:19
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
gotcha!
Y
00:21
Yasha
Created a small spreadsheet that calculates how much tokens a user would recieve according to the proposalv2 if they held LUNAv1, UST or pre-depeg LUNA.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_fGWxrnucWfva4qxpN-huk_ULHyU-cOMqK_2sQrJ6W4/edit?usp=sharing
A
00:24
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Does this include those who are in the process of UNBONDING at Anchor Protocol (bLUNA to LUNA) ?
Y
00:26
Yasha
The numbers for the total supply are taken from the coingecko, for the total LUNA supply it is a rough estimate (based on the 350m LUNA in circulation prior to depeg), if anyone has more accurate information on the total supplies of the tokens let me know and I'll update the spreadsheet
CC
00:28
Calin Chitu
Is the osmo/ust LP also considered? Most of my ust are there
00:30
I mean if they will be taken into the account of the new chain economics
D
00:31
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
What about luna & UST that was sitting on exchanges pre depeg?
TB
00:46
THORchain BULL
Just so I understand proprely, I should reset my max validator fee to 10% on the current chain to be able to get the 2nd one ?

I've never charged a fee at all to delegators.
A
00:48
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Sorry, where did you get this info? Does all the validators on the current chain has to increase commision to 10% ?
Y
00:49
Yeon
@terran_2 DMed.
GB
00:49
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
done. We suport the fork
Caleb L. Power | AxB | D₀ | MD invited Jayant Ramanand
J
00:52
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
We will collect a custom file which will set this on the new chain. Nothing needs to be donw at this second.
S Z invited CK | DeFiance
B
01:05
Bryan | DELIGHT
@terran_2 DELIGHT LABS supports to the next Terra
Yeon may have already DMed to you

https://twitter.com/delightlabs_io/status/1526443572530393088
R
01:09
Roman
an important question, will the leading exchanges support our fork and new network? there is some confirmation, Kraken agrees, if I understand correctly, but what about the others?
George Bunea | Syncnode invited Tibi K. | moonlet.io
N
01:17
NGINE | BlockNgine Validators
George Bunea | Syncnode invited Cosmin | Syncnode
L
01:51
Lumiere | spec.finance (won't DM, won't ask your 12 seeds)
In reply to this message
Hi, for the new chain, it is fork right? Does this mean all existing contracts still live? Or we need to set zero everything?
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com invited Tayo | 01node
I
02:08
Ilhan | Staker Space
In reply to this message
Hi @terran_2 ,
I have dm’ed you, we will validator the new and old chain.
S
02:09
Seb
In reply to this message
If the USP is so massive , you should run a 100% commission validator on the new chain me thinks
02:10
In reply to this message
Who is “us” @tundraV1 ?
Just trying to get clarity here
GZ
02:14
Guy Zyskind | SCRT Labs
@dokwon DM when you get the chance
Kos invited V H
D
02:35
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
P
02:55
Papi
In reply to this message
Exisiting projects would need to be ported over. The new chain will be an L1 without a native stablecoin .
DK
03:41
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
No just the max commission - so any commission under that amount should be fine
ms
04:25
mr smith
https://twitter.com/MCFvalidator/status/1526493690155479041
If there is a discord for the new chain pls someone send invite - thx - and good luck to all.
DK
04:27
Do Kwon 🌖
Can we use the rebirth channel?
04:27
GB
04:27
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
Where is that?
04:27
You mean this one?
S?
04:27
Spaydh 🌘💧
No the discord one i think
LE
04:30
Liviu | Easy2Stake.com
Move to another discord?
DK
04:31
Do Kwon 🌖
there is a rebirth discord
04:31
@terran_2 what do you suggest?
K
04:33
Konstantin | BTC.Secure
DK
04:33
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
awesome!
Zhuling Chen | RockX invited Shawn
Zhuling Chen | RockX invited Alberto
Zhuling Chen | RockX invited 🌻
SR
05:41
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
what counter?
05:45
In reply to this message
Is actively being discussed on the Discord server, join the conversation if you want.
S?
05:46
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
Can I get a link pls?
SR
05:47
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
sending you DM
S?
05:47
Spaydh 🌘💧
Thanks
J
05:49
JiuKelo | 01node.com
Can i also get an invite?
BA
05:50
Bogdan A.
In reply to this message
Can you send me the discord link? Thank you
GB
05:51
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
I would need an invite as well. Thanks!
LE
05:54
Liviu | Easy2Stake.com
In reply to this message
Can you share the invite link?
M
05:56
Mihai
In reply to this message
I would also need an invite. Cheers!
E
06:00
Evgeniy
In reply to this message
resend plz, dm’ed you before, still can’t join
SR
06:01
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
(fellas, I'm still reading this chat and the DM's. Please give me a few minutes, I'm not forgetting anyone (as long as you have DM'ed me already)
CC
06:21
Calin Chitu
I would also need an invite. Thanks
LE
06:21
Liviu | Easy2Stake.com
Why don't we have a shared link here?
06:21
Seems there are a lot of people that are not there
SR
06:34
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Some people that Nexus rallied under a group with the same name of an already existing collective (Terra Builders Alliance). Not sure if it was intentional to cause confusion or just not knowing of its existence 🤷
But either way there is a consensus that everyone should rally under the same place (which isn't "TBA v2"), so that everyone can voice their opinion in front of all the relevant eyeballs and ears.

The "Rebuilding Terra" Discord server is so far the elected channel of comms for validators + founders. Whoever says otherwise is just trying to split the community even further to be honest 🤷

Yesterday a meeting with >40 relevant people (validators, founders, TFL, etc.) already happened. The recording has been been put up online on the Shared Drive (that all founders have access to). These will continue happening every day so we can coordinate as a group and make faster decisions. These will also start happening on multiple timezones. There's entire teams dedicated to facilitating all the comms and Ops (both internal and external).
06:34
In reply to this message
Because they get leaked.
etienne | Setten invited Luc | Orne.io
J
07:20
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
I will get a new one up with Chinoman today.
07:24
@Chinoman10 will DM. The discord we make today will be focused solely on the technical aspects of the launch for now. We can open up more after fork.
For more general "rebuilding" or "philisophical" discussions about the terra ecosystem I still recomend this chat or the rebuilders discord.
We need a place where the validators can share technical information without the general noise for now.

We will onboard people who have signed up for validating on the new chain as soon as we get the server live.
SR
07:33
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
We can just use the validators exclusive chat, no?
07:34
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
573×1280, 78.0 KB
07:34
Only 1 person per validator has access to that chat.
DK
07:34
Do Kwon 🌖
may need to do a bit more than that
SR
07:34
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
We can make it so that multiple people can access but only one rep can vote on things (on Discord).
DK
07:34
Do Kwon 🌖
some validators have multiple ppl
SR
07:35
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Indeed, hence my 2nd option.
e
07:35
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yeah agreed, need at least several channels. it's too tiring to have notifications on one general channel
SR
07:36
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
@terran_2 you've been managing Validator comms for as long as I remember, so in the end I let you make the call, I'm just giving general advice.
We are available to help in any way we can.
07:36
In reply to this message
You can tailor notifications on a per channel (and server) basis.
e
07:37
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yes yes, that's what I meant :) -> need at least several channels for validators coordination.
minimum would be two. one for important notices (notifications on) and one for general chat (notifications off)
T
07:37
Tayo | 01node
In reply to this message
Can I get an invite as well
SR
07:38
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Ah, well we can use the announcements on the builders category (or the "semi-public" one 🤷‍♂️), and just tag Validators whenever it's important info for Validators.

I'm a big advocate of only pinging relevant people for different announcements.
07:40
In reply to this message
I'm having lunch now.. Give me a few minutes and I'll get back to it 👌

In the meantime send me a DM with your Discord username (so that I can tell it's you when joining), and I'll send you the invite as soon as possible (less than an hour).
07:42
In reply to this message
There's also no problem in creating a dedicated category for Validators (ones are read-only (announcements) and others are free chatting).

My point in continue using this server is that we already have a lot of validators inside.

Creating a new server and resending invites would be a lot of double work, that's all.
e
07:44
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yep, I agree! I was splitting hair about chan organisation :p
C|
07:49
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
Invite me as well please
07:50
I don t know who is in charge for this
07:50
clawmvp | 01node.com#8018
A
07:53
Aries @SynergyNodes
DK
07:57
Do Kwon 🌖
Awesome
A
08:19
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
No invite yet
08:19
alexandruast | stakesystems.io#0776
R
08:34
Roman
Please invite for RomanS | Luna Station 88#8757
Jared | TFL invited Amack
T|
09:24
Tibi K. | moonlet.io
can I get an invite also, please
Tibi K. | moonlet.io#6120
Z
09:25
Zero
J
09:30
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
right on
A
09:42
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Can someone please fix the invite thing? I don't like having to beg random people for invites. I understand that there are other channel(s) than this one where matters are discussed. Can someone make sure that everyone is in the loop by giving invites to everyone involved?
Shilin invited MT
R
09:57
Roman
I don’t understand this either, they wanted support from validators, but not all validators even participate. or it's some private party and not everyone was invited, sad to see what is happening
T
09:57
Thomas | Reality Flux | Orbital Command
In reply to this message
i sent a dm
M
10:00
MT
Hi, I am Terence from Forbole. Can the admin enable the chat history?
Cm
10:04
Cory moonshot
@Chinoman10 sent you a dm yesterday. Think it got lost.

Cory | moonshot#4268
c
10:04
curlycrypto | StakeWith.Us
PC
10:05
Peter Chainlayer
Whats the idea behind a new discord btw? I mean we managed to successfully halt and restart the whole chain in this TG channel and there already is a Terra Discord, why do we need a second one and who owns it?
J
10:11
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
gotcha
10:12
In reply to this message
We'll manage it. Previous discord will be for old chain.
This group has a lot of non-validators in it. We will need to coordinate things like gentx, specs, etc. Need a format better than telegram to coordinate the moving pieces.
SR
10:14
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
I'm going through my DM's once again to distribute invites to the "Rebuilding Terra" Discord server.
This Discord server is more for community decisions, and not technology steps specifically for Validators.
You can DM me for an invite (if you haven't yet). I still have a list of ~30 DM's to sort through, so please give me a few minutes, I'll go through them after sending this message.

There will also be a new Validators server, where @Jared_TFL will manage the invites and verifications.
PC
10:15
Peter Chainlayer
Wait so theres a “rebuild terra” discord and there’s going to be another one from Jared?
SR
10:17
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
The one managed by Jared will be similar to the old "Terra Validators" server that lasted more than a year.
10:17
It is exclusive to validators.
10:17
"Rebuilding Terra" is lead by the community, and so it has founders from every team and also several validators (30-40 so far).
PC
10:18
Peter Chainlayer
Gotcha, thanks for the explanation
SR
10:18
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
Alright... I'll go through my DM's now. 🙏
B-
10:30
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
@dokwon @bk2111 - a validator posted a note about legal aspects of hard fork. Is TFL able to position it as their own decision to hard fork and inviting existing validators. Community validators interests are in doing what's best for the community. Most of the community validators don't have legal counsel. Is it fair to rely on TFL/you in ensuring that there is no liability coming towards node operators?
Tibi K. | moonlet.io invited Adrian I.
T|
10:35
Tibi K. | moonlet.io
https://mobile.twitter.com/moonlet_wallet/status/1526586010402017280 Moonlet Wallet is supporting the forked chain.
TD
11:22
Terra Dactyl
I want to suggest that there be genesis incentives not just for builders to declare support but also for exchanges. Public confidence in the existence of liquidity will be crucial to regaining confidence in the future of Terra
S?
11:25
Spaydh 🌘💧
Good luck getting Binance’s ^^’
DK
11:25
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
I think we can get it
11:25
ok will get exchanges to declare public support
TD
11:26
Terra Dactyl
In reply to this message
🌖
S?
11:26
Spaydh 🌘💧
Wow, ok, that’ll help with legitimacy
OG
11:36
One GAIA
In reply to this message
that's 80% of the road to legitimacy... if there is liquidity, they will come.
I
11:48
Ignacio - Stakely
D
12:04
Dervish
How about people who put their UST in Luna dapps pools?
SR
12:07
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
A bit fat majority of my Luna's pre-crash were on a 1-year lockup on Astroport's Luna-bluna LP.
12:08
I'm pretty certain that is lost for good (I mean, they are still there, but... right now I have 300x bigger quantity since I bought the dip and invested just a fraction).
12:08
Anyway... let's discuss these things on the Discord server, yes?
12:08
Whoever isn't in it yet, please send me a DM.
12:08
I'm finally caught up with them.
C|
12:08
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
Where is the invite?
SR
12:10
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
sent in private on a case-by-case basis.
Links aren't shared in groups to avoid leaking.
s
12:10
schultzie | Lavender.Five Nodes
In reply to this message
can I get an invite as well please?
J
13:05
Jared | TFL
@ChaunceyStJohn and @Sunslinger

Have their commissions at 100% due to their business models.

What are people thoughts on how we would distribute staked tokens to them at fork genesis?
Should they have the same split as everyone else?
10% of the average stake?

I know some people were against any validators having a max commission above 10%
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs invited Sebastian J
B-
13:14
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
dont know what sunslinger does but for Angel, ok with an exception
SR
13:14
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
"sunslinger" is GJ from Flipside.
J
13:15
Jared | TFL
Aye, flipside used their validator income to fund bounty programs.
We’ve seen some interesting projects come out of their programs.
SR
13:15
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
You already joined :)
13:15
In reply to this message
100%.
13:16
We've been talking about the "Lunatic Score" the last few days for example.
TB
13:16
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
Just to understand, what will be theses staked tokens? The unvested ones?
J
13:17
Jared | TFL
Staked from what I understand in the proposal.
B-
13:21
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
is it not for profit i.e. they had 0 profit? i know the bounties ran into some amounts here n there but their commissions were much higher as well. i have nothing against a not for profit organization taking 100%
13:23
Hello @dokwon, @tundraV1, @MrRefractor, @Sebastian_Jer

- seeing that two factions are emerging on how new chain should be launched and there is a public difference of opinion/stand
- also seeing that lot of community members (new/old/whatever) are against a hard fork
- assuming that the current chain has the least chance of making holders whole and a hard fork is the best way forward in the interest of community, network, builders
- can you guys please work collaboratively and come to the same page
- also seeing that lot of chains are reaching out to individual terra projects and vice-versa and goodies/support are being offered with lot of mutual respect (even i have connected a couple of them when requested).
- there is also lot of negative vibes about TFL proposing or doing a hard fork, since the broader builders group are going to be the custodians of the chain anyways, may be let them assess it and run with it as appropriate (not suggesting that the ones named above have to do it)

since time is of essence, hoping that you all the visionaries will find a way forward in the path to recovery that best serves the community and builders
J
13:33
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
GF
13:56
GJ Flannery
@Jared_TFL looping in Dave (CEO) who can speak with most authority about how it’s set up
GJ Flannery invited Dave Balter
MA
14:30
Marius Abalaru
In reply to this message
Hello, can I please get the invite for the discord channel ?
14:30
I am
mabalaru#6177
ms
14:58
mr smith
@bigb4ever I'm sure everyone who bought millions of luna at $0.0001 is against a fork, but should we care about them?
FJ
14:58
Frank Jia
We're going to put the Terra V2 proposal to decide whether Galactic Punks will validate. Can we confirm the nodes we need to run for the migration?
J
15:01
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
It will be a new chain, so none of your previous nodes will be relevant.
Let me know when y'all decide if you want to validate on the new one or not.
B-
15:05
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
The only meaning of that statement is that you already have lot of people standing against the fork, Terra leaders divided over how to fork n having 2 proposals weakens their position significantly
ms
15:10
mr smith
yup, i get it... the different financial positions of participants is forming groups... can't blame ppl for arguing in their own interests i guess.... makes it hard to move forward as one 😔☺️
R
15:10
Roman
Why 2 proposals? did I miss something?
ms
15:11
mr smith
Read the comments under Do's proposal thread, a lot of people simply do not want a fork... to fork or not to fork, that is the question.
TU
15:13
The User
In reply to this message
You shouldn’t be that sure imho.
Most of the remaining community did and are simply not all positionned
15:14
and human is good at being against something and those people are always doing the most noise.
15:15
and I don’t think 5000 people represent the whole LUNA community 😉 ahah
SR
15:31
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
I'm coordinating accesses by DM's if you don't mind... I can't easily make invites now as I'm at a family event, so I'll just run through my DM's when I get back home.
FJ
15:31
Frank Jia
In reply to this message
So just a single node on the new chain?
TU
15:32
The User
In reply to this message
ideally testnet/mainnet for new chain but some were planning to have all 4 nodes
TN
15:34
Tom Norwood | Loop Finance
Guys we're supporting a fork. We just wanted to get our messaging right and work out how we were going to allocate new tokens on the new chain. But that's done now. https://twitter.com/loop_finance/status/1526660769269547010
J
15:34
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
testnet/mainnet will definitly be in everyone's best interest as a minimum.
FJ
15:35
Frank Jia
Sounds good, thanks all
H
15:43
Hyperion
In reply to this message
Thanks - I think there is some very positive momentum on Terra V2 and a unique opportunity to start a brand new L1 with an existing community and existing dapps.
GF
15:56
GJ Flannery
https://twitter.com/TerraBuildersU --- curious who this is?
TT
18:02
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
Rebuilding Terra Meetings
Tuesday, May 17 · 4:00 – 5:30pm
Google Meet joining info
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/ini-zfhb-muz
Or dial: (US) +1 617-675-4444 PIN: 612 829 942 2705 #
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/ini-zfhb-muz?pin=6128299422705
18:10
This is a general meeting for rebuilders to address points of discussion or any action items.

Moving forward, we will be running meetings in a way that covers action items and discussion topics submitted by all contributors and validators.

Until we have as close to consensus as possible in-terms of how to forge ahead, I believe that these sessions can serve to create a solid base of information sharing and high-level discussion that will allow our people to make the right decisions for their individual projects.
FJ
18:18
Frank Jia
In reply to this message
We'll be putting up an on chain proposal tomorrow so hopefully will have a definitive answer soon
Vini invited pmp
V
18:42
Vini
hey guys, meet @pmp888 from https://tfm.com/
p
18:44
pmp
Sup, Ty @unl1k3ly
Caleb L. Power | AxB | D₀ | MD invited Rodrigo Quan
19:00
Reflecting on this medium article I firmly believe this was a necessary moment for Terra. We had to become zero to become infinite.
19:02
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1280×600, 36.6 KB
19:02
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1280×642, 33.6 KB
19:02
At this juncture the entire world has been informed of what Terra is/was/will become again.
19:02
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1280×485, 76.4 KB
19:02
The proposed fork would provide 35% of all LUNA to LUNAC and UST holders at the time of the launch snapshot.
19:02
The fork represents an opportunity for anyone and everyone to obtain material stake in the future of the chain at a nominal cost by purchasing LUNAC or UST before the launch snapshot.
19:03
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1280×408, 38.5 KB
19:03
24-hour trading volume of LUNAC was over $1.5B
19:03
And yesterday LUNAC volume exceeded $3B
19:03
UST and LUNAC both remain Billion-dollar assets in defiance of what has already happened and in anticipation of what lies ahead.
19:03
People are taking the opportunity to join.
19:03
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
920×848, 32.3 KB
19:03
The number of wallets has never been higher.
19:03
This moment is the most egalitarian moment in the history of crypto since the original launch of Bitcoin.
19:04
The network effects after the fork will be something to behold.
19:04
The future of money is just beginning.
T
19:04
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
nice
19:04
I like the sound of that
A
19:08
Aquila (9R)
In reply to this message
Any notes/minutes from the meeting? Thanks in advance.
DP
19:11
Daniel Pratte
In reply to this message
IF
19:24
Iron Star Finance
"[Bitcoin] was strategically released into the wild (into an online group of cryptographers) at a time when no comparative technology existed. Bitcoin’s organic adoption path and mining network expansion are a non-repeatable sequence of events."
19:24
feels simliar to where Terra is today
JS
20:25
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
Can anyone interested in building on the fork please DM me any questions you have? Working on an FAQ and migration guide for developers.

Thanks!
WC
20:29
William Chen | TERRAN.ONE
In reply to this message
B-
20:30
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
@Jared_TFL - please update my validator position on v2 participation as "no position".
J
20:51
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
kk
tk
22:43
t kr
In reply to this message
We are in for the validating on the new chain as well. <DACM>
Do we have more details on the plan apart from, https://agora.terra.money/t/terra-ecosystem-revival-plan-2/18498?
P
23:34
PFC
out of curiosity how many accounts actually have more than 1M luna in them?
I was curious to know how much would be repaid if we used a lower cap.. say 100k luna
23:34
(the difference between ~$80m vs $8m)
DK
23:34
David Koh
In reply to this message
I like this idea. I feel the whale cap can definitely be lowered.
B
23:44
BC Chang
Hi, can I get an invite to the discord plz?

@Chinoman10 sent you a DMa while back~ plz and thank you
18 May 2022
t kr invited k90x
tk
02:03
t kr
Team,
Is there a new DISCORD channel that I can be added to. We run validators, wondering if there is a new one which has discussion for the new terra chain launch dicussion?
DK
03:29
Do Kwon 🌖
All - we've reached consensus with the Terra Builders Alliance on an updated proposal: https://agora.terra.money/t/terra-ecosystem-revival-plan-2-updated-and-final/18498
03:29
Most of the notable teams in terra are signatories, the TBA should be issuing a tweet shortly as well as from TFL
03:29
we should be able to put this to a governance vote today
C
03:32
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
looks good, everyone gets something that should help community morale.

it will help the dapps if there is a stablecoin available (USDC/USDT/BUSD) asap in LUNA 2 btw, stablecoin is crucial to most current dapps
DK
03:33
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
We have bridges committing, and Tether native still slated to launch
03:33
stablecoin support should not take long
C
03:33
CK | DeFiance
got it. will there be an 'official' one? if more clearly communicated, will help minimize changes required to dApps seeing UST as official stable
DK
03:34
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Still negotiating, will have visibility shortly
C
03:34
CK | DeFiance
will CEXs support airdropping vested tokens btw? may be bit messy
Z
03:37
Zon
In reply to this message
can we ask circle as well
03:37
usdc is more defi vibes innit
DK
03:38
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
it is what it is
03:38
In reply to this message
can you connect with Sam N?
03:38
lets push
Z
03:38
Zon
kk
D
03:40
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
Good question
DK
03:41
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
we've been coordinating, and i think most will.
03:41
we will be reaching out to exchanges to get their public support as well.
C
03:41
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
sounds good
D
03:42
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
Ok great thanks
T
06:37
Tayo | 01node
In reply to this message
I guess this will be a great one, if we can get their support

Binance in particular cos they have been quite vocal in all these
SR
06:40
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
They've been recorded too.
DP
07:08
Daniel Pratte
Quick question: if a validator plan on validating on both networn (the legacy terra and the new one, how would that work? should we prepare a second validator before the fork, one would fork and one would continue?
DK
07:10
Do Kwon 🌖
Yes. two validators
07:10
hopefully both networks are running for some time
DP
07:11
Daniel Pratte
So, how do we chose witch one to fork or not?! One will have all the staking, and one wont even be in the activeset
DK
07:14
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
i dont follow the question
DP
07:15
Daniel Pratte
I have 1 validator, staked in the activeset (top 130). If I do a second validator (one for the legacy terra, one for the new fork), I dont have 2 validator in the activeset…
J
07:15
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
you will have one validator in each set. They are seperate chains.
DP
07:16
Daniel Pratte
In reply to this message
So the end result will be to setup a 2nd validator using the same keys on a different chain?
J
07:16
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
you can use new keys.
We will coordinate all this in more detail in discord.
TU
07:18
The User
@dokwon
NFT-wise, they will be duplicate by the fork. Are you planning to set some conversations with project leaders around the coming issue coming up ?
E
07:20
Evgeniy
DK
07:20
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
wdym? can you explain more?
07:20
In reply to this message
yes
TU
07:24
The User
In reply to this message
when the chain will fork, everything will be duplicate. LUNA/UST/Apollo/Astro, LP, etc. everything.
07:24
Just like it's going to be the case for NFTs.
07:25
my question is; for any team not aware of that principle with fork. At what moment do you consider best for you to alert them haha
S
07:29
Seb
In reply to this message
Has any Oracle service expressed interest in participating in the new chain ?
It would be great to add the Chainlink BD here (@CL_ChrisC @CL_Johann)
A
07:36
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1125×1034, 57.7 KB
07:36
😢
C|
07:36
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
We can t keep up with messages like this anymore :)
A
07:36
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Just to remind you all when you vote or decide stuff, that there are human lives at stake
07:37
For fucking real
R
07:39
Roman
In reply to this message
the problem is that there is no money, and the result of the vote is not important per se, as long as someone does not buy the old token, or buy a new token, there is no money.
07:43
Even more so if there are two chains, it will be even less money. Only one chain should be, imho
DK
08:05
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
no, its not really a fork, its a new network. WASM slate will be clean at block 0
08:05
so everything needs to redeployed
V
08:20
Vini
In reply to this message
It would be a good idea to use the latest CW sdk (1.0), Tendermint (0.35 mempool prioritization) and IBC 3! I'm sure we will all be going to discuss new chain specifics later.
DK
08:21
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
yes, thats the plan
08:21
@jsonstallings is good endpoint to check on progress
V
08:21
Vini
Ty
JS
08:23
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
Band works over IBC, I’m working on a guide for this.
08:23
The others I’m not sure about but I’ll find out.
TU
08:27
The User
In reply to this message
okay, gotcha !
S?
09:24
Spaydh 🌘💧
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
800×371, 39.6 KB
Does this include bLUNA/stLuna/LunaX/cLuna etc?
JS
09:25
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
yes!
09:26
7 days
S?
09:26
Spaydh 🌘💧
Thanks for the quick reply Jason :)
IF
09:26
Iron Star Finance
In reply to this message
Does the snapshot have the ability to capture liquid staked tokens that were in the process of unbonding?
H
09:27
Hyung@crescent
sorry guys i have been missing info here but does Terra have plan to re-open the IBC so that Luna holders in other blockchains can transfer back to Terra before snapshot?
JS
09:27
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
yes! Gov proposal is in progress
09:27
09:27
In reply to this message
that I'm not sure about, will find out.
H
09:28
Hyung@crescent
In reply to this message
thank you we will vote soon.
IF
09:28
Iron Star Finance
In reply to this message
Thanks!
S?
09:29
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
Please tag me too once you’ve got the answer :)
IF
09:29
Iron Star Finance
Voted!
S?
09:30
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
Not sure this change will do. This is the pr that closed the channels:

https://github.com/terra-money/core/pull/761/files
JS
09:33
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
yeah you are right, will figure this out as well.
H
09:47
Hyung@crescent
In reply to this message
so from this, i can see that enabling IBC does not allow Luna holders in Osmosis/Crescent to bring back their assets to Terra.
E
10:02
Evgeniy
how projects will manage airdrop in a new chain? e.g. astroport luna pools?
H
10:03
Hyung@crescent
also Osmosis/Crescent Luna pools.
J
10:04
Jess
In reply to this message
we're working on snapshot taking mech. astroport pools that have UST/LUNA/bLUNA are covered, and will be credited back to the liquidity providers
10:05
i believe closing IBC channels to certain IBC networks were voted upon in this chat?
DP
10:05
Daniel Pratte
In reply to this message
Same for ThorChain LP ? :)
JS
10:06
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
it was, but now people want to reverse
10:06
control+z
J
10:06
Jess
i guess if the prop passes what we'd need to do is rollback the code part for hard block then
JS
10:07
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
right, another quick fork
H
10:08
Hyung@crescent
how about “Pre-attack LUNA holders: 35%” ? some Luna were in Osmosis/Crescent LP back in 5/7
J
10:08
Jess
but as we all know gov prop takes time. if it deems, let's try and come to an agreement in this chat
S?
10:09
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
I believe it was really important to Sunny, to protect Osmosis from the repercussions of the depeg (as Terra assets were pooled and bonded with OSMO).
CS
10:10
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
What’s the main rationale for aUST pre-peg snapshot but not UST?
10:11
There was a big ecosystem push towards encouraging off-chain UST liquidity
B-
10:11
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
and its equally important for terra community to have access to their coins and as Loop mentioned, there are ATOM, SCRT, other assets that need to go back to their respective chains.
S?
10:12
Spaydh 🌘💧
I understand that perfectly. I am not arguing for or against the reversal of the channel closure, simply providing context for why the changes where made in the first place.
TB
10:27
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
Way better proposal. I like it.
10:39
In reply to this message
There was about 150m in liquidity on tc, I can work with the team if you want a snapshot
10:40
LPs are still stuck there while we figure out asymetrical withdrawals into sym
A
10:45
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Any ideas why the previous proposals vanished?
10:46
There was a proposal on increasing the fees and burning them, I think we should take this into consideration
10:47
And also maybe add this to the master plan
J
10:48
Jess
In reply to this message
it was becoming a rant board, and we decided to whitelist visibility on station
10:49
In reply to this message
i'm afraid snapshot exporter should solely be computed from onchain data, at least technically. will bring this in our daily in hours tho..
GF
10:50
GJ Flannery
@kjessec LMK if Flipside can help support here
J
10:51
Jess
thanks! one of our analytics manager is camping on flipside 24/7 all the time chooching some metrics already
10:51
lol
OG
10:54
One GAIA
In reply to this message
pls pls pls get kucoin in this, Do
TB
10:58
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
They can export on chain records from lps. LMK how you need it
AB
11:07
Aleksandr Bezobchuk
Question, does "staking derivatives" include LPs on IBC connected chains such as Osmosis?
11:07
or are LPs screwed?
11:16
Could we move over to discord, where the conversation can be segmented, and have a room where the governance that DOES need our attention (such as 1299 and 1623) can be pinned?
JZ
12:06
Jack Zampolin
one note on changing the denom from the old chain
12:06
this will likely break IBC
JS
12:42
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
may be more of a marketing thing
12:42
than an actual code change
OG
13:29
One GAIA
Pre-attack aUST holders 500K whale cap:

Does this exclude wallets over 500k or every wallet gets something, up to the first 500k ?
l
13:41
luigi1111
surely has to be the latter
TU
13:47
The User
In reply to this message
Think its up to 500k
OG
13:48
One GAIA
In reply to this message
that's also my understanding... but worth double checking
TU
13:48
The User
In reply to this message
@dokwon can you validate this ?
OG
13:51
One GAIA
also for "Post-attack UST holders: 20%: 15% unlocked at genesis; 85% vested over 2 years thereafter with 6 month cliff"

for all UST one holds as of may 27th seems like buying into TerraV2, but the funds are not going into Terrav2 but into the hands of the gamblers trading UST until the launch
VB
14:31
Viktor Bunin
How many viable proposals are missing from station.terra.money?
14:31
https://station.terra.money/proposal/1273 just saw this with ~70m votes
I
14:32
Ignacio - Stakely
In reply to this message
That proposal has no sense, it won't work
VB
14:33
Viktor Bunin
Then it could be voted down, no?
14:33
How many others are missing?
J
14:43
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
It’s a txt proposal…
It literally won’t work.

Not passing any judgement. Just advising on how governance works.
As a txt proposal it can’t change the market module.
VB
14:44
Viktor Bunin
I understand, thank you. The point is that it's not being shown at all despite having 70m votes, and it's not clear how many other proposals are not being shown.
A
14:44
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I don't agree with not showing proposals
14:45
It looks fishy from the outside
14:45
And the same with the Terra 2 announcement on the website
14:45
image_2022-05-18_22-45-46.png
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
324.2 KB
e
14:45
etienne | Setten
it's available on other front ends tho: https://ping.pub/terra-luna/gov
but agree, there could be some more elegant way to do this probably
A
14:45
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Before the vote ended
14:46
Recent events don't look pretty, I have a bad feeling about this
C|
14:46
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
Why we have consorship on governance?
A
14:47
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Because there are people who can do stuff behind the curtains
14:47
I am reconsidering my vote
Z
14:47
Zion | TFL | OC
We needed to prevent spam and scam proposals that were being put up that could phish users or prevent people from voting on viable props due to all of the noise. We’re currently working on releasing some comms around this and whitelisting viable props again. Please stay patient with us.
C|
14:47
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
This is not right :)
J
14:47
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1280×736, 57.9 KB
Have you looked at is uncensored?
14:48
People can't find proposals that are legit and not just spam
A
14:48
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Bullshit
Park | Pan | Figment invited Elizabeth | Figment
J
14:48
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
e
14:48
etienne | Setten
maybe there could be a button like "show all proposals"
A
14:49
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
This is not how on chain governance works, mate
e
14:49
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
well, it's a centralised front end
K
14:50
Konstantin | BTC.Secure
In reply to this message
This is good option.
J
14:50
Jared | TFL
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1062×316, 13.9 KB
I don't think everyone needs to vote on something like this...
etienne | Setten invited AtoZ (Will not DM first)
e
14:50
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
@atozborg would you have some spare time for a PR ser? 🙏
Z
14:51
Zion | TFL | OC
The decline in LUNA’s price completely eliminated any barrier to anyone posting proposals. Bad actors (along with spammers) were just taking advantage of this by buying luna cheap and then posting phishing props. I agree with Etienne that we could have a “show all proposals” button for full transparency, but that would include all of the phishing props as well unfortunately…
A
14:51
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
You clearly do not understand what is at stake, and try to cut corners to justify your position.
A
14:51
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
I don't have access to message's history
e
14:51
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
oh, adding a "show all proposals" button on station governance
A
14:51
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
On it.
J
14:52
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
I didn't make this change. I am speaking as a user. It is hard to tell what isn't spam.
A
14:52
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Note that they are taking 8 hours+ to merge a one-line PR. Not sure it will be accepted.
J
14:52
Jared | TFL
There are also proposals that are strait scams saying "terra 2 is here click this link"
e
14:52
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
im sure @Jared_TFL will pass the word
A
14:52
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Instead of hiding them, a minimum cap on voting power is way better
P
14:53
Park | Pan | Figment
In reply to this message
This is a good approach, raising the min posting req
A
14:54
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
There was also a proposal of raising the min req. to post a proposal to ~ 500 USD
J
14:54
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
we are merging now.
14:54
I didn't have access to that repo. I found someone to merge now.
e
14:54
etienne | Setten
oh someone made that pr already?
14:54
In reply to this message
it takes a long time to pass
J
14:55
Jared | TFL
for 1273 specifically, that's the PR
e
14:55
etienne | Setten
ah I was talking a pr to add a "show all proposals" button
14:55
I think it would be a good middleground
Z
14:56
Zion | TFL | OC
@Mother0x @alexandruast The problem with raising the $LUNA cost to post is that the price of LUNA is volatile right now, so the price to post a prop could fluctuate dramatically.
J
14:56
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
If that is PRd we will merge that too.
e
14:56
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
awesome
Z
15:00
Zion | TFL | OC
In reply to this message
The fluctuation could end up rendering posting a proposal economically prohibitive
J
15:02
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
This proposal is now displayed if you refresh your governance page.
P
15:02
Park | Pan | Figment
In reply to this message
How dynamically can you adjust the parameter?
J
15:02
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
It takes a governance vote to change.
P
15:03
Park | Pan | Figment
So we'd have to adjust the parameter to protect gov proposal spam with a continuous gov proposal that accounts for price
A
15:03
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Working on it
M
15:04
Mr.K
In reply to this message
The current governance list is like a trash can. It's too cluttered to make a distinction between necessary governance. I think it's a very useful feature from a user's point of view to show meaningful governance by whitelisting it.
e
15:05
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
proposals are quite laggy, imo the current situation: no staking allowed, low initial cost is good
15:05
except from the front end spamming problem
A
15:05
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
The problem is that this approach opens the can of worms
AK
15:09
Alexander Kondakov
I agree with Alex. Leave as be and promote direct links on other resources, pin the important proposals to the top etc. - this would be useful. The current version looks very bad from the outside.
Z
15:29
Zion | TFL | OC
In reply to this message
The problem here is the same as one would need to determine what an “important” proposal is.
15:30
It also doesn’t help with scams as those would still be showing up along with all of the rest of the proposals
JZ
15:30
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
some of the proposals are literal phishing sites
J
15:33
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
literally. We are going to harm users by displaying them.
A
15:33
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
It's unfortunate that no one saw it coming. At the current price, one could spam millions of proposals and potentially crashing the network.
e
15:38
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
JS
15:40
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
Will get an answer to that tonight
SA
15:42
Sunny Aggarwal 🧿
Ok
15:42
Osmosis LPs were doubly rekt because not only did they have their LUNA go to 0, they lost all their OSMO to IL
15:42
And they were 2 week bonded just like Terra stakers, long term committed
JZ
15:44
Jack Zampolin
And the cosmos eco has really leaned in here
15:44
Telling that community that you don't care about them is a quick way to lose a major ally
J
15:45
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
we are reviewing. We want to make it come in line at least a bit with the current conventions in that repo.
It won't be long. Standby please.
15:57
In reply to this message
We are going to wait on guidance from upper leadership. Please standby a couple hours.
There are a lot of concerns around both paths of actoin at the moment.
JZ
15:59
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
Hey Terra peeps, the cosmos community has come to help y'all repeatedly both during this crisis and before during others. Continuing to ignore us is a terrible idea.
JS
16:01
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
Not ignoring you, see: https://t.me/c/1729598035/1915
16:01
Working on it!
B-
16:02
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
100% with you on this
JZ
16:03
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
I know you personally aren't but you also understand better than most the history here. Cosmos has always been treated as an afterthought
16:03
Many of our community bought into the terra vision
16:04
and we pooled our assests with ust
16:04
those funds are now completely down to 0
16:04
and we have jumped in and helped as much as we can fight the technical fires
JS
16:05
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
Totally understand and appreciate that. At this point I think it’s more of a technical issue. Do we have an idea for how this could work? Basically get a snapshot of holders, produce their Terra addresses with bech32, and add to genesis?
JZ
16:06
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
yes
16:06
please work with sunny on this
A
16:06
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
What about the pools?
e
16:06
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
Sure, thank you Jared!
JS
16:06
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
Sunny said they’ll be included in the snapshot.
A
16:07
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Awesome
Z
16:07
Zion | TFL | OC
In reply to this message
TFL would be in a difficult legal situation if we were to knowingly display scam sites to users. We’ll have to discuss this internally and decide if this makes the most sense. After thinking this through, I’m not sure it makes sense. We should instead probably focus on getting all viable proposals whitelisted for people to vote on and continue protecting users from scam sites. To your knowledge, have all viable proposals been whitelisted at this point?
A
16:08
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
It took 8 hours to whitelist one proposal. I don't believe it is a solution.

People are taking this "whitelist" as censorship and fraud. It is not better in my opinion.

Instead, we could add a disclaimer when clicking the checkbox.
e
16:10
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
I understand, it’s completely fine to me. There are other fontends
Z
16:16
Zion | TFL | OC
In reply to this message
I definetly understand where you’re coming from ser. We’ll discuss this internally today and determine the best course of action moving forward. We appreciate all of your feedback!
A
16:25
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Sure, keep us updated.

Here is another user complaining about his proposal: https://agora.terra.money/t/governance-section-not-showing-proposal-1597-and-yes-vote-not-recorded/32268
FJ
22:13
Frank Jia
It's looking like GP will be validating Terra V2. @Jared_TFL @Chinoman10 can you add me to the necessary Discord? frankfka#6780
J
22:30
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
yep yep, dm
MM
22:44
MC — Marte Cloud Validator
In reply to this message
Jared can you add us as well
J
23:15
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
For sure, are you going to validate on the new network?
B-
23:17
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
community is still awaiting a clear/open communication over what happened in last 10 days. https://agora.terra.money/t/proposal-to-the-luna-community-by-the-guy-who-forked-ethereum/32193/4
T[
23:23
Todd [ block pane ]
I contract for the Aardvark team to run their nodes. Aardvark is 100% for submitting a gentx on a new network too. So many messages to read here, not even sure who to tag for getting in correct chats…
B-
23:23
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
J
23:23
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
DM
23:27
In reply to this message
Welcome aboard
C|
23:28
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
@Jared_TFL there are 2new discords?
J
23:30
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
There is one for validators who are going to validate the new chain.
23:31
In reply to this message
There are like... I dno how many for people who just want to talk about proposals and the future.
23:32
A lot of people splintered off since this telegram group was formed. I'm not keeping track. Having to focus on the task at hand.

@Chinoman10 is in one of them, he can send invites to that one.... (sorry Chinoman, I don't know who else can do that if you want to tag them in)
C|
23:58
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
Got it
23:58
Thanks
19 May 2022
A
00:15
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I don't agree with how events unfolded recently, so #no_with_veto from us.
N
01:37
Neece | SolidStake
In reply to this message
So did we.

The enthusiasm to continue is great to see, however the solution doesnt rectify the problem or address the communities concerns, of which there are many. This just seems like a way to ignore all of that and pass the buck to the community.

What is being proposed is nothing short of demeaning. What is terra without stables, it's nothing. I understand the need to focus on saving the Devs but most apps focussed around the UST stable, so if that's not there then this point is bollocks.

The focus should be on the investors who lost all their UST and Luna value and transparency on the events that unfolded. Simple. Until that is the focus, we vote no with veto to these shameful proposals.
M
01:38
Mr.K
In reply to this message
There are many validators on the v2 validator list that have not declared support for forks on Twitter. Is this optional?
01:48
I think validators who will participate in v2 should participate in all of this together.
R
01:49
Roman
In reply to this message
where can i see this list? we have not yet decided whether we can qualitatively maintain two validators or not
01:51
In reply to this message
Can you provide more details on what exactly led you to this decision?
A
01:52
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
I think Twitter post in support of v2 is not mandatory. Its only to public declare that they support the new chain. If many validators are arleady there on v2 list and not yet posted a twitter, most likely they are going to validate on new chain.
e
01:52
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yeah interested too
A
01:52
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
+1
A
01:57
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
stake.systems is a community validator, we don't have any foundation delegations, our stake is organically grown by the community, so we must listen to the community. The community is against the fork.
e
01:57
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
What metrics are you using to claim that the community is against the fork?
A
01:58
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Interested to know that too.
A
01:58
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I have my own telegram channel with my stakers
01:58
I listen to them
e
01:58
etienne | Setten
Personally all the people I know that are involved or invested in the ecosystem for a really long time are for the fork
01:59
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
1070×175, 23.1 KB
And all the arguments I receive against the fork are always this kind of broken data:
01:59
In reply to this message
ok makes sense then
A
01:59
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
ok. But, did you explain your personal opinion too? Cause, most of them may be influenced by outside noise.
e
01:59
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
+
R
01:59
Roman
In reply to this message
Please share it. If possible
e
01:59
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
such as these kind of stuff that are spammed beyond reason
A
02:00
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
How can you ensure that people who joined are really your stakers? We are all raided.
A
02:00
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I expressed my opinion, but after I saw how things evolve, I don't want to be part of this
02:00
In reply to this message
Most of my community is 2 years old
02:00
I have members there since the beginning
A
02:00
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
This is being used in wrong way. You cannot trust that poll.
e
02:01
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
sure, that's what I meant
CC
02:01
Calin Chitu
I still support the fork, I hope it will happen asap, as I’m getting tired of this organised spam protest
e
02:01
etienne | Setten
not a single of this data point makes sense. it's more like the BSC luna flipper army opinion
A
02:02
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I fail to understand how the majority of my channel members could organize themselves and be against this if it's soo good
A
02:02
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
Do they understand than they can still activate a burn on LUNC even after the hardfork?
A
02:02
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I also have some points against it, given the recent events. I don't like it.
R
02:02
Roman
we haven't voted yet, but we're leaning more and more towards the ABSTAIN option. Our task as a validator is to ensure the operation of the network, but what the network should be like, how it should develop, is not up to us, but to the delegates, we are trying to convey this to them, but our telegram channels and twitter do not have a large audience
A
02:02
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Yes
A
02:03
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Its easy, they are being influenced by the twitter noise. Well, in your case, you cant do anything.
e
02:03
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
what's the "recent envents" you mention often?
A
02:03
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Hiding the proposals with the reasoning that they are spam
e
02:03
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
I don't think anyone is saying that, I respect your choice, just interested in the reasons
A
02:03
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Do not stepping off the Terra2 initiative
A
02:03
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
yes, I too belive so. We have to focus on important things now. Burn on LUNC can be done later.
e
02:04
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
ah damn, because of this?
A
02:04
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
ya, this is a valid reason. However, it may be necessary becasue of too mush spam. May be - as someone pointed out, we need to have a button saying - show all proposals.
A
02:05
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Assets being moved from Terra1 to Terra2 - which by all means is kinda taking the stuff from business 1 and moving them to business 2 just because business 1 is bankrupt. It's kinda stealing, you know...
e
02:05
etienne | Setten
I think it's good to remember that terra station, while being the most used wallet out there is a centralized service owned by TFL. It's open source, anybody is free to host it on its own or use a different client (they actually are other front ends with all the polls displayed).

Decentralization on the front end comes from the fact that you can run MANY front ends on top of decentralized blockchain technology
02:05
front ends will never be decetralized with current web tech
CC
02:05
Calin Chitu
Why do we need proposals to launch a new chain in the first place?
e
02:05
etienne | Setten
and will always be owned and subject to legal considerations by a single party
S
02:06
Seb
In reply to this message
Which assets are going to be moved ?
A
02:06
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Because assets need to be taken from Terra 1
A
02:06
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
As i understand, its a new chain. Not a fork. And, projects have to decide if they want to remain in the current chain or move to new chain.
CC
02:07
Calin Chitu
In reply to this message
What? They can’t be “taken”. There are two diferent chains
A
02:07
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
It is a new chain/hardfork, no asset will be moved.
e
02:07
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
(and also I think it makes sense to hide literal scam proposals when thousands of new retail investors are flooding on ecosystem)
JS
02:07
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
for sure, it's clear there's some misunderstands happening.
e
02:08
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
the process to whitelist a proposal is a PR on github, it's pretty transparent. AFAIK, nobody got denied listing a proposal as of now, you can check here: https://github.com/terra-money/station/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed

EDIT: mb, seems like it's this repo and there was some denials: https://github.com/terra-money/assets
overall I maintain my point, it's out in the open
JS
02:08
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
I'll see if we can put together some docs that better describe the process.
e
02:08
etienne | Setten
I'd like to ask you to reconsider
A
02:08
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
Some of you here clearly don't have any knowledge of economics.
An asset is anything that brings or lower the economic value of an entity.
JS
02:09
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
and you voted yes for the burn proposal?
e
02:09
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
If we can skip the ad hominem that'd be cool :)
S
02:10
Seb
In reply to this message
Maybe you can be more specific about which assets will be stripped away from the current chain and ported over to the new chain in that case
A
02:10
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
who posted yes for the burn proposal? Does people not know that 99% of the volume is on CEX and NOT on chain? The proposal does not make any sense at all.
JS
02:10
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
bingo
Z
02:10
Zon
You can browse all voting proposals by clicking the voting tab already
e
02:11
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
oh, didn't even know that, nice
P
02:11
PFC
Sigh.. 1692 should be disabled as it's illegal
Zon invited Sim
e
02:13
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yeah, literal death threat
J
02:13
Jared | TFL
Photo
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
591×1280, 54.5 KB
02:13
Lists and instructions on how one person can email all of you at once are being circulated.
P
02:14
PFC
Do you have a link to the sheet?
J
02:14
Jared | TFL
Yes
A
02:15
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I personally don't want to be part of a chain that thinks it's ok to just take software, developers and everything Terra 1 had and move them to Terra 2. In the past, everyone just pushed this idea that a blockchain IS an entity. Well, how is Terra 1 compensated for this? All development happened on Terra 1 until now.
A
02:15
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
Report it as "Spam"
JS
02:17
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
so what's your suggestion? Burn proposal?
A
02:19
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
I stated my suggestions before:
1. Terra 2 must be without DoKwon
2. Terra 2 must start from scratch without taking any property from Terra 1
3. Terra 2 must have completely new leadership
02:20
Basically, I just agreed for a fork, not for a takeover
02:21
In reply to this message
What's stopping this from happening?
R
02:22
Roman
In reply to this message
we all know that crypto in its current form is a zero-sum game. when someone wins, someone loses.
A
02:22
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
Well, tell that to the millions who lost their life savings.
DK
02:23
Do Kwon 🌖
Not sure what to do guys - if i dont do or say anything, they say im deserting the community

If I try to find a solution they say I should step down
A
02:24
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
I personally have nothing against you, Do. You did everything in goodwill.
GB
02:24
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
you can make your own fork, there can be hundreds of forks, the majority will decide where they want to adhere or not. Also all the noise is mainly caused by the people that have no idea how things work, they didn't even understand how UST was desigend. Their missunderstanding that the burning will lead to UST peg being restored is completly wrong. They are simply hanging to a hope with little understanding
A
02:24
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
It is really sad for them, we have all lost a lot. But I don't believe we should be responsible for people putting their life saving on a crypto market.
e
02:24
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
+++
02:24
In reply to this message
I think my main thing is that this will not happen
A
02:24
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
But the project failed. In business, when this happens, the leadership resigns.
DK
02:25
David Koh
In reply to this message
Please try to find a solution sir. Definitely think that TFL still has a part to play in the Terra comback, although it cannot be the dominant driver but be more community driven.
GB
02:25
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
I would always preffer to take the road with a man that failed and still tries instead with someone that has no track record. Failure is one of the situation where you learn the most valuable lessons
R
02:26
Roman
terra 2 starts from scratch, as far as I know, each delegator from the old network will get a proportional share in the new network, the old network can continue to exist, am I right?
e
02:26
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
I think TFL funds being excluded from the fork is a good step in that direction
DK
02:26
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
correct
A
02:27
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
this is true, but the main concerns, at least in my community, is that everything terra 1 had is being taken away without their consent. They feel like they are being robbed.
02:28
What people feel is the ultimate important thing
R
02:28
Roman
In reply to this message
+1
GB
02:28
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
but terra 1 remains, nobody is takin anything from anyone. Now most of the people are biased and we can't rely on their feelings
e
02:28
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
so projects should not be able to willingfully migrate to terra v2? or am I misunderstanding?
A
02:29
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
I believe there is a misunderstanding here. Nothing is taken from Terra 1. Project leave or migrate if they want to.
02:29
If Terra 2 does not exist, those projects would leave to Juno or Osmosis or any other chain if they want.
GB
02:30
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
exactly
e
02:30
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
yep
PC
02:31
Peter Chainlayer
To me ultimately the current Terra chain is unusable (376.69 M (0.01%) staking ratio). burning that amount of tokens is simply impossible, there are probably accounts that have billions of tokens, all they have to do is not spend it until they have a majority of tokens (if they haven't already). I haven't seen a single proposal that would actually fix the current chain (even if I received 100+ emails and loads of msgs in our TG as well implying it can be fixed)
02:32
I don't know if terra2 will fix it, but at least its a viable option
A
02:33
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Yes, the current chain would be tough to fix and maintain since, like everyone like to say, it is built on a stablecoin - which failed.

The only viable option is to move ahead and create a new chain, saving all the project that does not rely on UST, and start building from there.
N
02:34
NGINE | BlockNgine Validators
We should probably commit to adding a burn to Terra Classic after the launch of Terra(when there is spare bandwidth) just to make people happy
PC
02:35
Peter Chainlayer
aside from that the only people with a vote at the moment on Terra (in onchain governance) are people that had Luna at the time of the first chain halt since we removed staking then. So we can't really go on any percentage there if you ask me, UST owners don't get a vote here either, for all we know all UST owners might be in favor of a Terra2
GB
02:38
George Bunea | Syncnode
In reply to this message
a solution might be denomination, but that's another story. Considering the amount of LUNA that was accesible for pennies, I 100% share your point of view.
PC
02:38
Peter Chainlayer
Also, if anyone has a simple idea of doing that, I'd be interested in seeing the vote tally of both 1623/1273 if you leave the validators out of the voting (both in stake weight and in # of people). That would actually give a good indication of where the community really stands perhaps
02:39
(gonna try to whip that up myself using the LCD)
02:42
15311 votes for 1623 and 1808 for 1273
A
02:42
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
In reply to this message
It's like saying that it is ok to hire people from a failed company 1 to build company 2 because, if not, they will be hired by other companies, anyway. While company 1 is still owned by stakeholders.
You can get very nasty charges for that, for further economically crashing the entity.
It is not important what the final result is, as long as the community trust is lost.
Luna cannot exist without community.
Luna2 must have nothing to do with Luna1, zero interference.
Thus, Luna2 proposal on Luna1 governance board is a moot point.
Let the team decide individually what they want to do.
If the result is a chain governed by some centralised elite, then I am out of it.
PC
02:42
Peter Chainlayer
thats pretty telling I guess
02:46
not looking at stake weight:
"VOTE_OPTION_ABSTAIN"
1623: 112
1273: 15
"VOTE_OPTION_NO"
1623: 1533
1273: 32
"VOTE_OPTION_NO_WITH_VETO"
1623: 2521
1273: 25
"VOTE_OPTION_YES"
1623: 11171
1273: 1736
A
02:49
Alex Ast | stakesystems.io
That "Terra 2.0 is Nearly Here" on the https://www.terra.money/ website, before the end vote date, was a very bad move imo. It destroys trust by creating narratives that the thing was planned before (even if it wasn't).
e
02:51
etienne | Setten
In reply to this message
They are free to go wherever they'd like. if they prefer going to company 2 rather another company, I think it's saying enough
PC
02:53
Peter Chainlayer
I think 11171 people might disagree with that 🤷‍♂️its as Do states, if you don't do that people complain why nothing is happening, if you do put it on people make a narrative. It looks to me like the people in favor of terra2 are just not complaining about the burn proposal (but just ignore it or not care) whereas people in favor of the burn proposal have a strong sentiment against a Terra2. That doesn't make either option wrong, as NGINE pointed out, we can still do the burn proposal on Terra1 if people so please
02:53
(however, someone needs to code that up and so far I haven't seen much developers on Twitter/TG. the current proposal isn't really executable afaict)
JS
02:58
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
that's 11171 individual wallets?
PC
03:02
Peter Chainlayer
yeah it should be
03:02
used /cosmos/gov/v1beta1/proposals/1623/votes?pagination.limit=10000
JS
03:02
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
that's great data, thanks for pulling that!
PC
03:03
Peter Chainlayer
doesn't show vote weight unfortunately, but number of wallets is already a nice metric if you ask me
E
04:19
Evgeniy
btw why https://fcd.terra.dev/v1/circulatingsupply/luna change over time if we turned off luna minting/burning?
DK
04:19
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
swap fees went up a lot, and its coming out as staking rewards
E
04:26
Evgeniy
In reply to this message
thx for clarifying!
SR
05:24
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
FYI the new Discord isn't just for people who are in agreement with the last proposal.

It's literally a place for all founders and validators to join and have a voice for the many different topics that need discussing.
05:27
In reply to this message
somethingelse (not sure what his TG handle is), and GJ from Flipside (also not sure on the handle) can create invites as they are Mods.
Any TFL member can also make them, and last but not least... the Ops team can as well. On that team there's Trevor Ogata (TIX/Angel/TBA (original, not the fake one)), Jeff from the original TBA as well, and one or two other people from Intern Capital.
S?
05:54
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
Gj is @Sunslinger
B-
06:43
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
@Somethingelse0 - not in this group though
DK
06:50
Do Kwon 🌖
Hey guys
06:50
Wanted to get a sanity check on an amendment
06:50
- Builder Alignment Program - distributed by 30 day moving average from pre-depeg of the protocol project's market cap, not TVL. This is to accommodate feedback that TVL outcome is vastly different depending on the nature of the protocol, while marketcap is a rough proxy of the "usefulness" of the protocol.
- Pre-attack Luna holders distribution - for all holders with a snapshot balance of 10k Luna or less, 30% unlocked at genesis; 70% vested over 2 years thereafter with 1 year cliff. This is to ensure that small Luna holders have similar initial liquidity profiles. This would cover 99.81% of Luna wallets while only representing 6.45% of total Luna at the Pre-attack snapshot.
- Post-attack UST holders distribution - 20% --> 15%. This is to ensure that depeg related allocation is on par with the original stakeholder (pre-attack Luna) allocation. The 5% saved goes to the community pool.
- Increase initial float: all initial float allocations modified from 15% --> 30% to increase initial token supply.
06:50
How does everyone feel about these changes?
S?
06:51
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
How do you calculate the share of Lido on Terra in Lido’s MC though?
CS
06:52
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
I agree with these changes but will plead again that the 5% gets added to pre-peg UST allocation
DK
06:52
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
has lido committed?
CS
06:53
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
I’d love 1% staked for social impact to build a giving pledge into Terra 2.0s core but understand this is unlikely (will again make the point that PR is important here tho)
DK
06:53
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Could we make a gov proposal from the community pool once the network goes live?
06:53
I will draft it together with you 🙂
S?
06:53
Spaydh 🌘💧
In reply to this message
We need the DAO’s approval since it’ll be a different chain, the proposal should go live today.
CS
06:53
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
In reply to this message
Great call, thank you 🙏
Do Kwon 🌖 pinned this message
TU
07:05
The User
In reply to this message
🙏🙏
R
07:07
Roman
In reply to this message
why are we making changes if there is already a vote going on?
DK
07:07
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
We could make an amendment
07:07
and ask people to change their vote if they disagree with changes
07:07
I feel that in the grand scheme of things these changes don't really change much
07:08
but many people feel strongly
TU
07:08
The User
In reply to this message
I wold go in the same sense as @ChaunceyStJohn I’d add it to ust prepeg
07:09
But if we changes proposal now, I feel like people vision will mostly go toward « at the middle of things, the give us less and take more for them as community pool »
R
07:10
Roman
In reply to this message
I agree that this can be done, but it looks like that the current proposal was offered in a hurry and then even more people will be nervous
TU
07:11
The User
People are already irritated that their post depeg worth almost nothing, not sure removing a 5% will help to the cause.
I’ve been making what I could to explain with more details the situation on twitter and bring people on board, but I wont be able to pass an amendment
07:11
In reply to this message
+1
DK
07:12
Do Kwon 🌖
Ok - do you guys suggest we just leave it alone?
TU
07:13
The User
In reply to this message
That’s what I’d suggest to be fair.
Only thing that could go along is the 15->30% as it is beneficial for everyone
07:13
But changing allocation in itself sounds dangerous
07:14
In reply to this message
But would need to make sure everybody knows it has changed
R
07:19
Roman
I would leave the current proposal as it is until the end of the vote and would launch a separate vote to correct certain points of the proposal. the iterative process is good, it is impossible to think through everything in one go
H
07:21
Hyperion
Vote isn't binding anyway as this is just a fork but in the interests of time an amendment is probably better
TU
07:22
The User
Agreed with both of you
@MrRefractor @RomanSvet
C
07:34
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
Agree with @RomanSvet, better launch a separate vote at the end of the current proposal so things seem less hectic.
07:35
In reply to this message
Agreed on this point. Changing allocation again is reopening the Pandora's box.

The debate on if late buyers are 'speculators' or 'people saving the peg/LUNA price' will never end.
DK
07:35
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
How about just increasing float
07:35
Not controversial at all
C
07:35
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
this is totally right way to go
07:35
yep
07:35
else the chart will look like most alts now lol
07:36
down only after initial pump
DK
07:36
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
By how much do you think
C
07:38
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
50%?
07:39
never did simulation, need to ask experts on how much liquidity there will be to absorb initial selling pressure
DK
07:39
Do Kwon 🌖
By 50%, or 15–>50
C
07:39
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
latter
DK
07:39
Do Kwon 🌖
Ah
C
07:39
CK | DeFiance
but just an arbitrary number now, never run the maths
07:39
you want people to focus on the projects not the initial Luna price movements basically
07:41
In reply to this message
allocating tokens to project by a blend of TVL and market cap should also not be controversial
SR
08:19
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Many essential projects/teams didn't have TVL. That metric is heavily biased.
Yield Aggregators, DEX's and borrowing/lending like Apollo DAO, Spectrum, Astroport, Mars Protocol, Loop, Anchor, etc. were the "blackholes" of TVL, but what about Coinhall, Smartstake, Terrasco.pe (what happened to it btw?), Apeboard, GraviDAO (Lunar Assistant), Yield Foundry, and others?
Vlad invited Andreas
C
08:27
CK | DeFiance
In reply to this message
yes I agree, saying blend of TVL/market cap just to avoid total change from original proposal
ms
08:32
mr smith
In reply to this message
+1
J
08:48
Joe | Coinhall
In reply to this message
+1. Same argument for Smartstake, coinhall that have tens of thousands of users, high traffic but no token hence no marketcap
FJ
08:51
Frank Jia
In reply to this message
Sure, can you add me?
SR
08:52
Sergio 'Chinoman10' Rebelo
In reply to this message
Thought you were already in.
Sending a DM.
MM
09:30
MC — Marte Cloud Validator
In reply to this message
yeah 🙂
J
09:48
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
❤️ Will coordinate in DM, happy to have you.
Y
10:21
Yeon
In reply to this message
Terraswap has TVL. but no marketcap.
Conor invited Karma
CS
11:38
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
@Jared_TFL Angel Protocol will continue to validate old and new chains
J
11:39
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
Excellent. Good to have you, will connect in DM
11:39
In reply to this message
(Check discord pls ser)
SJ Park 🌖 invited Chris Amani | Terra
12:05
Hero is building an IBC NFT bridge. And enable Terra NFT owners to bridge their Terra NFTs to Terra 2.0 chain
12:05
Currently trying to figure out if there is a way to get any financial support anywhere in Cosmos for this
s
13:32
schultzie | Lavender.Five Nodes
I may have missed it, but has the new github repo been created yet?
13:33
let's get this party started with gentx, etc.
D
14:13
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
We’re you guys also part of the active set pre depeg
JS
14:24
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
not live yet, but soon!
T
14:39
Tundra V1
Hey guys
14:40
Does anyone know how this would work? Someone just reached out to:

“Yo! Never really reached out to you or established rapport…saw the size of your loss and I’m in the same boat. Wiped out a decade of grinding in this space. Condolences bro.

That’s not why I’m writing tho. Wanted to get your thoughts on my linked tweet. Am I tripping or what??? Do you know the edge team? Not as concerned about everyone else as I am about them as they have deleted their discord. A little clarity and communication is needed given the amount of capital involved and that is now up for grabs https://twitter.com/chadilac0x/status/1527347639766831110?s=21&t=HHA5od3kSvdsgoYWcB4P_Q

What say you Tundra? Pretty sure TFL is working on an index to sort it out but idk. Should I just chill or keep pressing the issue? Any insights? https://twitter.com/Chadilac0x/status/1527347639766831110
14:40
Any ideas on how this would be accounted for in the new network?
CS
15:11
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
Would ask the question to Do. People have been pushing for pre-peg to include UST and he’s said a couple times that’s going to be difficult to track in all its different locations
15:11
I’ll reach out to Edge now
E
15:59
Evgeniy
In reply to this message
We should count locked aUst for sure if possible. Btw is there any plans to migrate Mirror on a new chain?
T
15:59
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
okay, thank you sir
T
16:08
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
I'd rather see these changes get implemented.

Even if it shows that there is some uncertainty about the design of the new network, I think that it's very important that the tokenomics are setup the right way with the right float, otherwise down only risk can kill any new momentum.

I think it would be wise to go in front of the community and talk about these changes / see what the feedback is. If it gets "good feels" from people (which I think it will) maybe raise this fwd as an amendment. I would suggest not waiting until the vote window closes to do this as it's just wasted time.
CS
16:24
Chauncey St. John 🌔😇 | Angel Protocol
In reply to this message
+1
Z
16:30
Zon
In reply to this message
+2
T
16:30
Tundra V1
In reply to this message
+3
E
16:37
Evgeniy
Is there any chance for bridged luna holders at pre-attack snapshot in chains like solana, aurora etc. to get new tokens?
MM
18:07
MC — Marte Cloud Validator
In reply to this message
Amazing! DM anytime 😍
DK
19:27
Do Kwon 🌖
Amendment.pdf
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
44.7 KB
19:27
Will submit this amendment today if there is broad consensus
TB
19:28
THORchain BULL
This is better
TU
19:29
The User
In reply to this message
I have a few question for you about LPs. I don’t know if the question is for you or @dokwon though.
Will LUNAs in LPs be rewarded by the airdrop? Specifically on THORChain
DK
19:30
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
i think the consensus is that its impossible to index all the crosschain luna ... it was bridged to too many chains
TU
19:30
The User
So what will happen with that supply ? Removed from eligible claims ?
DK
19:31
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
i need to understand how the thorchain bridge works
19:31
if it locks Luna up on the terra chain
19:31
and issues a synthetic
19:31
then the thorchain team can simply elect to distribute the airdrop themselves
TU
19:31
The User
In reply to this message
That was a bit of my question. If you need me on analytics let me know
19:40
Btw, when should we know if we are eligible for funding ? (I remember filling a form for that posted here or new discord)
SA
20:10
Sunny Aggarwal 🧿
In reply to this message
Osmosis community will provide a snapshot of LUNA and UST on Osmosis
DK
20:10
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
can you coordinate with Jason from our team?
SP
20:11
SJ Park 🌖
In reply to this message
JS
20:11
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
I'll get a room going!
M
20:12
Mike
Could you add me to the room as well? @jsonstallings
JS
20:12
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
for sure!
SA
20:14
Sunny Aggarwal 🧿
In reply to this message
Sg thanks
TB
20:22
THORchain BULL
In reply to this message
Can we do this with thorchain plz? I’l get the snapshot from core team
20:58
Put out the amendments
20:59
Announcement should be going live shortly
20:59
In reply to this message
ill speak to JP and see what i can do
TB
21:08
THORchain BULL
Thanks
Vlad invited Will Stahl
N
23:32
NGINE | BlockNgine Validators
I cannot believe how many people are asking me everyday to vote against fork and add burn.
Would it be possible to make a public commitment to adding the burn after the new chain launches when there is bandwidth
and make it more clear both Terra2 and Terra Classic can run in parallel
just to show them we do listen and care about their opinions
maybe we can even ask CZ to send their attention towards him
D
23:41
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
In reply to this message
Does this snapshot include exchange wallets? Luna & UST?
JS
23:42
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
In reply to this message
I’ve seen a script going around that will email all validators automagically.
CC
23:43
Calin Chitu
In reply to this message
Some of them ar funny (some conspiracy theories you can't imagine). I started to read them :))
JS
23:43
Jason Stallings (octalmage) 🌖
Pretty annoying since none of them actually have staked balances. I think anyone can work on the burn, or will likely invoke another fork of the chain and coordination with the validators.
DK
23:43
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Yes
D
23:43
Dan - ChainofSecrets.org
Thanks 🙏
H
23:46
Hall Architect | Coinhall
In reply to this message
Yea can confirm, we're getting bombarded with emails 🤣
A
23:47
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
ya, we too are getting too many emails. I just ignore them. Not even open them.
N
23:47
NGINE | BlockNgine Validators
In reply to this message
I keep trying to tell them and explain why it can't practically work
23:47
but they are so insistent
A
23:49
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Ya, same here too. Someone joined our telegram channel and started posting some info like support the burn and dont support the fork etc etc. I tried to explain to them that it wont practically work and they dont accept. I stopped explaining anymore.
Tundra V1 invited Midas
S?
23:55
Spaydh 🌘💧
Hey @MoonMidas, how are you holding up?
20 May 2022
M
00:02
Midas
Who kicked me out?
James Parillo invited AIRTX
J
01:30
James Parillo
In reply to this message
This is correct. And was by design, no?
T
02:44
Tayo | 01node
In reply to this message
+1
02:48
Hi @dokwon or a tfl member, Is it possible to post the transaction hash of the btc lfg used in defending ust.

Users are hysteric at this point and I feel it is extremely important we try to dispel rumours as much as we can.

Let’s show the community that their voices are heard and all we are doing is in their best interest.
02:48
In reply to this message
I really do hope you don’t ignore this
I
02:51
Ilhan | Staker Space
In reply to this message
same here, getting flooded with requests to vote against it. Not sure always how to respond to it and also not sure if they are delegators of our validator. But trying to understand what they are hoping for.
C|
02:51
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
we as well
02:51
it s a nightmare
I
02:51
Ilhan | Staker Space
yeah man, never had this kind of pressure as a node-operator
T
03:13
Tayo | 01node
In reply to this message
It’s a whole lot
R
03:14
Roman
I tell them to vote themselves to override my vote
03:15
but most don't get it
03:16
or don't want
C|
03:17
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
they do, but they lack the voting power we have 🙂
A
03:17
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
In reply to this message
Most can't, because they are new buyers
C|
03:17
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
it s mostly small fishes
A
03:17
AtoZ (Will not DM first)
We are raided from BSC people since CZ tweeted about Luna
C|
03:17
Claudiu Nae | 01node.com
they probably not even staked
R
03:20
Roman
maybe we should allow delegation, everyone will rush to buy the Luna to express their position and voila, the price of the Luna will go up
K
03:20
Karma
We are all getting bombarded with requests and demands and It's really just a question of mental health at this point to select what to engage with. If a person can't be bothered to research and know they can override the vote they don't agree with - it is not worth our time to step in as educators in these circumstances. Applaud everyone's perseverance 👏
A
03:21
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
delegation on current chain? Thats a bad idea. Cause, its very easy to buy a lot of LUNA and hijack the chain with voting power.
R
03:21
Roman
So what? You buy, they buy. Market will decide who will own the network
03:23
if the network continues to exist we will have to allow delegations
A
03:24
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
ya ya, this will happen. I mean, this should happen. But, when it does happen, we need to make sure that the trusted validators should have enough voting power. I think this can be done if TFL has got all those trillions of LUNA minted.
03:25
But, enabling delegation now, is a bad idea. My personal opinion.
C
03:28
Chee How
In reply to this message
I've a friend who bought the dip, thinking that LUNA would go up. In the end he got 4 million for just a few thousand dollars. I'm sure there are others who have a lot more. How much money do we have to put in to make sure that the chain isn't controlled by an adversary?
03:29
It's probably better at this point to let the dust settle and see how things transpire before restoring delegations.
R
03:36
Roman
I speak as a validator. I don't care who controls the chain. if someone wants to control it, let him buy and let him stake on the validator. I am sure that there will be many who want to be the king of the network and they will compete with each other, even I will buy Luna to strengthen my position in the network (probably) This struggle will lead to the stabilization of the network. Nobody is interested in investing a lot of money to kill the network.
I
03:37
Ilhan | Staker Space
Is the goal to stabilize the current Terra Network with V2 in the making ?
R
03:38
Roman
otherwise I don't understand the point of keeping the network alive. i say why we will be forced to enable delegation back
A
03:40
Aries @SynergyNodes
In reply to this message
Well, I think the plan is to start the new chain, and after that, re-enable the delegation on Terra Classic chain.
I
03:41
Ilhan | Staker Space
Well I think the network should stay alive right, there are other assets on it and currently this can bemonitored. Also a lot of DAPP coins such as Astro, ANC etc.

What does enabling delegation give you ? It’s just going to be more of a shit-show most likely.
R
03:44
Roman
well, at least those who bought later but did not delegate do not decide the fate of the network. it was just the fear of losing the network that led to the decision to disable delegation. but in fact there is not much difference, the market would decide what will happen to the network
03:45
it's just my thoughts, after the dust settled and I had time to think
Tundra V1 invited 4484
4
09:13
4484
hey everyone
09:14
quick question maybe u guys can help answer for me. my luna and bluna were in astro luna-bluna pool. those count to my luna v2 airdrop right?
09:15
thnx @anonsleepy for the invite
C
09:56
Conor
Galactic Punks will continue to build and support Terra 2.0 and our plan is to open source all of the DAO's NFT on-chain voting contracts once done.

https://twitter.com/galactic_punks/status/1527664241964195843?s=20&t=WAAhoG4YLJjNejrnFHQEvw
J
11:30
Jess
In reply to this message
yep
OG
13:02
One GAIA
In reply to this message
will CEXs that use a single address for deposits be treated as > 10k LUNA or < 10K LUNA?
J
14:20
Jordan
What will be the airdrop status of UST held hostage within protocol lockdrops?
(Like Kinetic Money for example)
4
15:44
4484
In reply to this message
thnx
JZ
15:50
Jack Zampolin
In reply to this message
Congrats
15:51
This echos my concerns
J
15:54
Jared | TFL
In reply to this message
We already worked this out.
15:54
In reply to this message
Here
Other Mike invited Sturdy
TT
18:35
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
Would we want input from a community lead like Cephii?
18:36
He's got some ideas on how to make the new chain successful or at least set us up for success out the gate.
DK
18:38
Do Kwon 🌖
In reply to this message
Sure
TT
18:39
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
@dokwon for sure. @vladjdk can you invite him: @EnergyIntensive
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha invited Cephii
TT
18:46
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
Adding @EnergyIntensive. (Cephii)
C
18:46
Cephii
Ok in
V
18:47
Vlad
Welcome brother
C
18:48
Cephii
Hey hey, just need to get history to show
V
18:48
Vlad
Check now
C
18:52
Cephii
Still can’t see it but it’s ok. My main focus is to build utility for Luna2. We need at least 10 reasons to hold it. Projects using it as a DCA mechanism for users to buy alts using the yield is one thing all projects should consider to drive value into their systems. a dashboard to show all the projects and their staked luna2. So you “stake” your luna2 with projects just like you stake with validators.
18:59
Luna2: collateral, staking yield, utility in dapps, possibly build it into NFT’s, governance, higher yield for longer term holders, rapid unstake (with 10% of luna burned as a penalty), liquid staking derivative built into the core protocol.
TU
19:19
The User
@EnergyIntensive if I can say one thing, I’m so fucking glad to see you in here
TT
19:27
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
@TheUserYouKnow we nee all the firepower we got.
TU
19:28
The User
In reply to this message
V
19:28
Vlad
In reply to this message
Try leaving and rejoining
19:28
Setting has been changed
TT
21:01
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
Rebuilding Terra Meetings
Friday, 20 May · 7:00 – 8:30pm
Google Meet joining info
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/ini-zfhb-muz
Or dial: (US) +1 617-675-4444 PIN: 612 829 942 2705 #
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/ini-zfhb-muz?pin=6128299422705

General Meeting is open.
TT
21:17
Trev TIX - Angel - Angel Alliance - TeFi Alpha
Meeting is done after general updates. There is a proposal in the prop channel in discord so please take a look at that revolving around general framework and process.

If you need help getting into the discord, please talk to @Chinoman10.

Please make sure to take time for your mental and physical health; I know many of us (me included) have been going days without sleep or ample rest.
21 May 2022
Hyperion invited Jimmy Le
Hyperion invited Ryan Lion
M
01:13
Michael Ng
4
07:11
4484
(not sure this been discussed or not cuz I can't see history)

one thing that maybe is not core to the rebirth but still important is the visual representations of Luna Classic vs Luna 2.0.

There needs to be agreement on universal icons. Maybe the blue terra (I see ftx using this for UST now) for old and the yellow for the new? or a totally new icon?
J
07:30
James Parillo
So we change proposals mid-vote now?
B-
07:30
BigB - Smart Stake Validator - Dont Trust DMs
In reply to this message
Different colour is not enough
P
07:31
Park | Pan | Figment
In reply to this message
+1