Note that the situation with Terra is dire right now. Cryptocurrencies from this ecosystem have collapsed significantly without any significant recovery. Yes, the LUNA token has jumped thousands of percent from its price bottom, but before that it has almost completely zeroed in value.


LUNA token price performance

The news background around the project is also thickening. For example, yesterday we learned about a comparison between the Terra ecosystem and a pyramid scheme. And the author of the comparison was legendary billionaire Bill Ackman. You can read more about his point of view in a separate article.

How will the Terra project be rehabilitated?

Do Kwon himself outlined the plan on Twitter. The “old” Terra blockchain is to be called Terra Classic, with the LUNA token being renamed Luna Classic (LUNC). Accordingly, the new blockchain that will be allocated after the hardforge will be called Terra. Something similar already happened to Etherium a few years ago when the Ethereum Classic project was formed as a result of the hardforward.


The key difference in the new blockchain will be the absence of the UST algorithmic stackcoin, which was one of the key components of the current collapse. And since LUNA and UST existence mechanisms are linked in the current blockchain, we will essentially get a regular blockchain without any key features after the hardforward. This is the reason why many community members oppose the fork.

By the way, the majority of our Telegram Channel members also spoke out against the initiative.


Voting on the need for a hardforge among 2Bitcoin chat subscribers

The hardforward proposal has already received votes from 49 percent of crypto-enthusiasts with LUNA in the stack. A quorum of at least 40 per cent needed to be reached for an affirmative decision, after which the decision taken would be considered final. A quorum was reached yesterday, with 80 percent of participants voting in favour of the hardforward. Abstentions were 4.87 per cent, with another 14.83 per cent voting “no with veto power”.

Voting status at the time of writing

According to Decrypt’s sources, the situation may not be as straightforward as it first appears. For example, voting on the official Terra forum is shaping up quite differently. Here you don’t need a LUNA to vote – all you need to do is register. In this poll 7083 people have already taken part. 91 percent of them are against the hardforward and only the remaining 9 percent are in favor of it. Also in the comments to the poll, a very large number of crypto-enthusiasts express strong disapproval of the hardforward.

Terra forum voting

Someone on the forum suggests a radically different mechanism for resolving the issue:

I will support the fork ONLY AFTER someone from the team explains WHY we can’t implement a token burning mechanism. Most of the community wants it and is willing to stay and support the project, and I don’t understand why they are being ignored. Until then – NO.

Others condemn Kwon and the Terra team for their “authoritarian” approach. Here’s a similar quote.

They don’t consider the will of the community. It is becoming more obvious by the minute that the same people who caused the disaster are exercising authoritarian control and want to get rid of the coup they have engineered. The community is screaming NO and they pretend not to see it, just continuing with their own agenda.

Well, it’s not without the banal taking out of spite on the developers for the huge financial losses after the collapse of the project. For example, another upset member of the Terra community called Kwon a “narcissistic asshole”.

The CEO of cryptocurrency exchange Binance, Changpen Zhao, has also previously spoken out against Do Kwon’s strategy. He stated that conducting a hardforward “will not create value out of thin air” and is essentially a useless exercise. Zhao’s words were also echoed by Dogecoin creator Billy Marcus. He noted that Do Kwon is simply “trying to get people to throw money into the fire to save one of the dumbest things in the cryptocurrency world.”


We think the hardforward proposal has already become quite controversial. Obviously, the idea of a new network suits the creators of the ecosystem, which means further developments are likely already predetermined. However, there is no explicit support for regular users for the fork, so the prospects for a separate blockchain are also unclear. Why would new investors contact a revamped Luna after all that has happened? In addition, the reluctance to follow the offer of existing users in the form of a coin burn will surely affect the loyalty of current investors as well.


What do you think about this? Share your opinion in our millionaires cryptochat. We discuss other important developments there as well.