During a vote on whether or not to execute Do Kwon’s plan to resurrect the Terra blockchain, he changed it.
Terraform Labs CEO Do Kwon offered a “rebirth” proposal after TerraUSD (UST) stablecoin collapsed, proposing the creation of Luna (LUNA) 2.0 tokens on a new network.
Despite the fact that the original idea is now going through an on-chain vote, he changed the proposal today. Kwon indicated that he changed a few distribution settings “to meet community comments” while this so-called “rebirth” concept is still in place.
When the depeg happened, UST holders who had their tokens staked on Anchor received fewer LUNA 2.0 tokens. There was a 15% reduction in their distribution share from the previous 20%.
Two of the stakeholder groups that have been suggested to get a portion of the new tokens were revised by Kwon, who changed the vesting timetable. A two-year vesting time was imposed on the remaining 70% of LUNA 2.0 tokens as a result of Kwon’s decision to raise the initial token to unlock the percentage from 15 to 30 percent.
In the midst of on-chain voting, an amendment to a proposal is rare. Some have questioned the legitimacy of Kwon in light of the developments that have occurred in the last several years. Usually, when a proposal is revised, it is done before the vote rather than during it. FatMan, a Terra analyst and commentator who prefers to remain anonymous, emphasised the importance of holding a new vote on each new proposal.
While the majority of people had already voted, FatMan asked, “How can you make substantial revisions to a proposal mid-vote’ when most people have already voted?” “Major revisions should be presented as a new proposal,” he said.
It was decided by a validator on Wednesday whether or not Kwon’s initial suggestion should be adopted. At the time of this writing, 80 percent of the votes are in favour of it, with just 15 percent opposing it by veto. It’s too soon to tell whether Kwon’s plan will succeed, considering that there are still five days to go. As long as there are more than 33.4 percent of “no with veto” votes, the whole proposal will be thrown out even if it has the approval of the majority of validators.