Terra Classic statsLUNC · USTC · ON-CHAIN DATA
Reading the proposal and its separately reported chain context.
Loading the proposal. Its status, vote amounts and original source times will appear when the readings are ready.
Back to governanceWaiting for evidence.
Waiting for evidence.
Waiting for evidence.
Waiting for evidence.
This pending view does not establish a proposal result, current voting power or a successful source read.
This is a community led proposal for a parameter change to adjust the on-chain tax rate to 1.5%. This would bring us back to the original 1.2% burn tax, with 0.3% to fund the chain by the current on-chain 80/20% tax split (0.15% to the community pool and 0.15% to staking rewards). The original 1.2% burn tax was removed after a few weeks in 2022 which was too early to judge whether it would be a long term success, though our burns were good at that time. As we can see from the 0.5% tax raise from 0.2%, it resulted in higher burns and more funding to the chain overall, without any discernible volume loss or on-chain capital flight. We believe a 1.5% total on-chain tax is reasonable and will be accepted by the community as a whole after implementation. After a few months it will become normal just like the 0.5% tax is normal, becoming accepted as common and standard, but bringing strong benefits. In addition, the chain already has the dapp smart contract whitelist from the tax in place which dapps can apply to be listed on, as well as there was a recently passed a proposal to re-work the tax to implement it in gas fees to make it easier for dapps. This means a tax raise will not harm utility. If we make this tax adjustment we can increase our LUNC and USTC burn rate from the tax 3-fold, from 0.4% to 1.2%. We also increase our funding to the community pool from the tax 3-fold from 0.05% to 0.15%. We also increase our funding to staking rewards 3-fold, from 0.05% to 0.15%. This proposal which brings back the original burn 1.2% burn tax plus 0.3% to fund the chain is important to bring to vote before the crypto bull market, to take advantage of the high on-chain volume when LUNC rises. We have already seen large burns on 0.5% tax, and 1.5% total tax will increase our burns and funding for our chain and rewards for staking delegates. Please cast your vote: 1. YES to adjust the on-chain tax to 1.5% from 0.5%, resulting in a 1.2% burn tax and 0.3% to fund the chain (0.15% to the community pool and 0.15% to staking rewards). 2. NO to keep the current 0.5% on-chain tax the same. 3. ABSTAIN if you don't want to vote YES or NO but want to contribute to voting quorum. 4. NO WITH VETO if you wish to exercise VETO power against this proposal which could lead to the loss of the 5M LUNC deposit, which was contributed by different members of the LUNC community. Discussion: https://commonwealth.im/terra-classic/discussion/14392-parameter-change
Connect Keplr to read your vote and review a new vote or update while the chain keeps voting open.
REJECTED · Voting deadline
Your wallet holds the keys and approves each transaction. A submitted vote can have no voting power; participation weight and final eligibility are determined by the chain.
Submitted
17 Dec 2023, 20:48:14 UTC
Vote closed
24 Dec 2023, 23:01:18 UTC
Not approved
The proposal did not produce an approved governance action.
Proposal status, current block and node version are separate responses with their own original clocks.
A reported PASSED status for routed protocol messages is consistent with successful governance handlers in supported SDK versions. The production fork and its version at execution are not independently established here. A text mandate still needs delivery evidence; a requested treasury payment is not a reconciled recipient payout.
Current block response metadata
Reported response header height: 31256589 · reported
Public requested / response origin: Withheld or unavailable / Withheld or unavailable
Node info response metadata
Reported response header height: 31256589 · reported
Public requested / response origin: Withheld or unavailable / Withheld or unavailable
Cached responses keep their original completion clocks. The block header time is a reported chain time, separate from HTTP completion and page assembly. Missing, invalid, future, wrong-chain or legacy source evidence is withheld. The block and node-info reads have no common-height guarantee; reported response metadata does not authenticate chain state.
A current block reaching an upgrade target does not prove software activation or validator adoption. A separately reported current node version does not establish the historical execution version or which proposal caused it. These responses do not independently verify execution receipts, recipient payouts or off-chain delivery.
Current or final voting power, calculated from the on-chain tally.
Historical bonded stake and vote-close parameters are not available here. Turnout and threshold checks are withheld; the recorded proposal status remains authoritative.
Amounts use the separate tally endpoint response.
Selected tally
Current staking pool
Current tallying parameters
Current reported SDK context
The model uses SDK0.53.6/math1.5.3 fixed18-place quotient and half-even rounding on reported integer aggregates. Quorum allows equality; approval and veto require strictly greater shares. Expedited approval uses its separately returned expedited threshold. Missing supported SDK/rule/threshold evidence withholds decisions. Internal fractional voting power and production custom tally logic are not reconstructed or independently established.
Cached inputs keep their original completion clocks. These independently read responses have no common-height guarantee; reported headers do not authenticate chain state. Missing, invalid, future or legacy evidence is withheld. Reported zero votes stay zero; unavailable amounts are not zero votes.
Current stake and thresholds are shown only as current context. They are not used to reconstruct a closed proposal’s turnout or threshold result. This does not establish historical voter eligibility, voting weights or vote-close rules. Amounts are approximate displayed LUNC from reported micro amounts; these reads do not verify execution, payouts or delivery.
Quorum
Not available
Participation unavailable
Approval
Not available
41.81% decisive Yes
Veto
Not available
9.29% of participation
What this message can change—not a prediction of price.
Each proposed field is compared only with the returned response from its own module.
Displaying 1 of 1 proposed parameter fields; 0 outside the 24-field display limit. 0 matched, 0 different, 1 unavailable among displayed checks.
Treasury Tax Policy
Original module response evidence unavailable.
Each clock belongs to that module response, before later requests and page assembly. Cached data keeps its original completion time. Missing, invalid, future or ambiguous source evidence withholds the current comparison; unavailable does not mean unchanged.
Matching compares the displayed serialized field values. A current match or difference does not establish historical causation, which proposal last changed a value, an independently verified execution receipt, a paid recipient or delivery. Separately read modules have no common-height guarantee; provider-reported headers do not authenticate the chain state. Truncated or unavailable checks cannot establish a complete proposal-wide parameter match.
Changes between retained samples near vote close and the 7, 30, and 90 day targets. Sample times and a 36 hour tolerance show how closely each pair matches its target.
Retained outcome assembly available
These retained comparisons have a separate assembly clock. It does not refresh the original proposal, block, node or parameter source clocks.
These times describe optional assembly, separate from retained sample capture times and original upstream response completion. Optional outcome work has a 1.2-second wait budget. Core reads and server load can make the total response take longer. The same admitted work continues after that wait; later requests can reuse its completed result. The original core cache and source clocks remain unchanged. No automatic page polling is added.
Average block time
Preferred signal: context
7 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
30 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
90 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
Staking ratio
Preferred signal: context
7 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
30 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
90 day target
This comparison applies to passed proposals.
Sample times are retained capture timestamps, not original upstream read times or verified chain heights. The nearest supported sample within 36 hours of each target is used; equally close samples prefer the earlier capture. Identical duplicates are merged and conflicting values at the same clock are withheld.
This is a change between two retained numeric samples, not complete coverage of the intervening period. Timing and metric changes do not prove the proposal caused an effect, executed a protocol action, paid a recipient or delivered a promised result.
/cosmos.gov.v1.MsgExecLegacyContent/cosmos.params.v1beta1.ParameterChangeProposal