Controversial Terra Classic Proposal Passes With Less Than 30% Of Validators Voting

Proposal 10879 passes to subject every spend of community assets to an on-chain governance vote.

The Head of organization at Terra Classic independent development group TerraCVita, Rex Harrison, AKA Rexzy, in a tweet yesterday, disclosed that proposal 10879 had passed the governance vote with less than 30% of validators voting.

My article on recovering us from the aftermath of 10879 passing on a voting turn out of less than 30% of validators. It’s old school but it’s worked for millennia.

I just published Trouble at City Hall — financing the LUNC road map. https://t.co/iPQL5ZScQW

— Rexyz (@RexYellerBelly) November 9, 2022

The proposal, which has been the subject of controversy within the community, will subject every spending of community assets to an on-chain governance vote. Notably, popular community figure Vegas proposed it to prevent the management of newly discovered $4 million in off-chain assets by a few individuals trusted by the community with the right expertise to carry out development efforts to fix the chain efficiently. 

With the proposal passing, the $4 million in assets will also be subject to a community vote. In a medium blog post, Rexzy explains that it poses several risks and hurdles to the network’s development. 

First, the community will have to convert the $4 million in off-chain assets to Terra Luna Classic (LUNC) or TerraClassicUSD (USTC), which are very volatile assets. Consequently, the network may need more to fund development activities in a market crash. Additionally, it risked pumping or dumping the price of LUNC. Secondly, with the lifespan on average for each governance vote being two weeks (1 week for the community to review it and an extra week for voting), it means that for each spend from the community pool, developers will have to wait at least two weeks to receive funding.

Aside from slowing down the network’s progress, it could be catastrophic in an emergency.

As such, unsurprisingly, the proposal received pushback from Rexzy and the TerraCVita. Highlighting why the developer-owned validator voted “no with veto,” Rexzy noted that:

• The proposal did not go through the normal consultation period of seven days.
• It was impractical as not all of the community’s assets are on-chain.
• The writing was vague.

Notably, the TerraCVita member has proposed a workaround now that the proposal has passed governance. According to Rexzy, it will function as a compromise of the proposal by Alex Forshaw and core developer Edward Kim. 

Consequently, he says the community has to vote for a trusted executive subject to the same level of accountability obtainable in the corporate world, including third-party audits. The community will task the executive with preparing a comprehensive roadmap with an estimate of the funds to carry out the work and a provision for emergency funds. Notably, this executive can then request the funds through the grants scheme managed by Edward Kim.

In addition, he asserts that the community also has to pay these individuals at the same level as executives running other $2 billion businesses.

The Terra Classic community is pushing to rebuild its broken chain, and recent debates have revolved around how to compensate current developers and attract new ones. Notably, the approval of the Terra grants scheme is a significant step in that direction and signals to the broader development community that the network is willing to fund builders. It could speed up the rebuilding of the chain and create new use cases.

However, managing $4 million in off-chain assets has remained the subject of heated debates.

– Advertisement –