LVS retweeted
Large number of critical/high security vulnerabilities across the CL8Y ecosystem's services have been patched. More fixes will be incoming over the next few days, so please be expecting short outages as services are patched and reboot. - CF
UPDATE: Frag has addressed our concerns, see conversation and link: discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/…
Please encourage validators to not support discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/…
This proposal forces all contract code to be first approved by TerraClassic ($LUNC) governance. That means critical security upgrades to cl8y dex, mitigations of live exploits, and future features, must all pass a validator vote. Not only does this mean every feature we build has to be approved by validators, it also means critical security upgrades have to wait 7 days to be deployed. Security vulnerabilites must be addressed in minutes, not days. - CF
LVS retweeted
UPDATE: Frag has addressed our concerns, see conversation and link: discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/…
Please encourage validators to not support discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/…
This proposal forces all contract code to be first approved by TerraClassic ($LUNC) governance. That means critical security upgrades to cl8y dex, mitigations of live exploits, and future features, must all pass a validator vote. Not only does this mean every feature we build has to be approved by validators, it also means critical security upgrades have to wait 7 days to be deployed. Security vulnerabilites must be addressed in minutes, not days. - CF
LVS retweeted
Followup post on form: discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/…
TLDR: As long as its paired with immediate whitelisting of the CL8Y multisig, CL8Y ecosystem will not be severely impacted by the proposal.
LVS retweeted
Bridge transfers from @TerraClassic_ to @BNBCHAIN were temporarily paused due to a community member's wallets being hacked.
After investigating - Confirmed: No CL8Y ecosystem dapps or contracts have been compromised. 80% of the victim's cl8y has been frozen and will be recovered.
A full report on the incident is live here: git.cl8y.com/code/cl8y-dex-t….
CL8Y Bridge unpaused - all transfers are now reenabled. If you had a pending transfer, it will now go through. - CF
Our $USDT /UST1 pair with $20k liquidity has been created. The CMM will be acquiring USDT in $50 chunks over the next 24 to 72 hours to bring the bridge ratio up to our 2x target ($5k, currently at $1k). This is the first of our bridged liquidity pairs. If theres a token you'd like to see available - btc or other crypto majors, stocks, commodities like gold/silver, please reply and let me know!
dex.cl8y.com/charts/terra1qf…
LVS retweeted
🚨 𝗛𝗘𝗫𝗫𝗔𝗚𝗢𝗡 - 𝗔 𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗠𝗔𝗟 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗧 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗩𝗔𝗟𝗜𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗢𝗥 𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗜𝗖𝗘𝗦
@hexxagon_io , as the infrastructure provider managing GreenpeaceUNITED on #LUNC, I believe you need to review the conduct of this validator against your own published Terms of Service.
𝗟𝗘𝗧'𝗦 𝗟𝗢𝗢𝗞 𝗔𝗧 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗢𝗪𝗡 𝗥𝗨𝗟𝗘𝗦.
📜 𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝟮(𝗔) - 𝗠𝗘𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗥 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗗𝗨𝗖𝗧
Your terms prohibit using your services for illegal or fraudulent activities.
📜 𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝟮(𝗕) - 𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗜𝗖𝗘 𝗥𝗨𝗟𝗘𝗦
Your terms explicitly prohibit:
❌ Collecting data from other users without permission.
❌ Engaging in unlawful, harassing or defamatory activity.
📜 𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝟴 - 𝗦𝗨𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗦𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡
Hexxagon reserves the right to suspend or terminate services, including for violations of its terms.
📜 𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝟵 - 𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗣𝗨𝗧𝗘𝗦
Hexxagon reserves the right to intervene in disputes at its discretion.
𝗡𝗢𝗪 𝗟𝗢𝗢𝗞 𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗔𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗗 𝗘𝗩𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘.
Screenshots show members being required to:
🔴 Provide wallet addresses and staking confirmations for registration in a private tracking database.
🔴 Prove delegations to GreenpeaceUNITED and Luna Strike Force BNB.
🔴 Comply within 24 hours or be banned from the private group.
🔴 Meet staking and charitable donation conditions for access to certain discussions.
𝗠𝗬 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗧𝗢 𝗛𝗘𝗫𝗫𝗔𝗚𝗢𝗡:
Does this conduct comply with your customer agreement, particularly Section 2(B)?
Are validator operators permitted to maintain databases linking community members to their wallets and use access restrictions to enforce participation?
And if you determine that a customer has breached your terms, will you exercise your powers under Section 8?
I am not claiming these screenshots alone prove an illegal act or contractual breach. I am asking you to investigate and provide a clear answer.
𝗩𝗔𝗟𝗜𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗢𝗥𝗦 𝗦𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗟𝗗 𝗕𝗘 𝗛𝗘𝗟𝗗 𝗧𝗢 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗙𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗗𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗦.
Infrastructure providers have standards too. The community deserves to know whether they are being enforced.
🔗 hexxagon.io/terms-of-service…
#LUNC #TerraClassic #Validators #CryptoGovernance #Hexxagon #BINANCE #USTC
LVS retweeted
CL8Y DEX on vyntrex: ~$240K liquidity.
On DeFiLlama: ~$121K.
Same DEX, same day. 🤔
Neither is wrong, they just count differently. So we pulled the on-chain data to show exactly why, and which tracker is right about what 👇
coinmarketcap.com/community/…
$CL8Y $LUNC #TerraClassic
LVS retweeted
📊 $LUNC - ARE WE BURNING TOKENS WHILE PRICING OUT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY?
I analysed 19,351 actual Binance LUNC/USDT trades over 24 hours, representing $1.014M in trading volume.
The results reveal something important about how crypto markets operate.
📉 Consecutive trade price movements:
• 69.09% occurred at exactly the same price
• 94.69% were within 0.05%
• 99.51% were below 0.1%
• 99.99% were below 0.25%
• 100% were below 0.5%
💰 Trade sizes:
• Median trade: just $10.25
• 88.52% were under $100
• 95.88% were under $250
These aren't individual traders' profit margins. They illustrate a market built around thousands of small transactions, with market makers, arbitrageurs, and automated strategies continuously recycling liquidity.
Now consider Terra Classic's 1.5% on-chain burn tax.
When taxable transfers cost substantially more than the small price movements that dominate exchange trading, many low-margin strategies become harder to operate economically on-chain.
Binance trading isn't directly comparable to taxable on-chain activity, and these figures don't prove how much volume the tax has displaced.
But they raise an important question:
Are we sacrificing the economic activity Terra Classic needs in pursuit of higher burns?
$LUNC needs an economy worth transacting in, not just a supply worth reducing.
📊 My ongoing burn-tax tracker:
leonardolunc.org
#LUNC #USTC #TerraClassic #Crypto #DeFi
🤖 Made with AI
LVS retweeted
Using CL8Y can be a game changer, especially for arbitrage traders where every fraction of a percent matters.
The big difference compared with something like BNB is that you don't have to spend your CL8Y to get the fee discount, you simply hold it. As you move up the tiers, the trading fee keeps falling while the CL8Y remains yours.
Combine that with wrapped assets avoiding the 1.5% tax on every internal trading leg, and the economics become very compelling for high-frequency traders.
Looking at the latest volume numbers its nice to see im not the only one who sees this as a game changer
Arb trading is just one type of trading CL8Y + wrapped assets is a benefit to all traders
LVS retweeted
Largely agree now, and these are fair distinctions.
On available vs callable: correct, and deliberately so. 1,785 is the user-held redeemable claim (the CR liability); how fast it can be drawn is rate-limited by the window buffer and the per-tx/daily caps, because UST1 is built specifically not to be instantly bank-runnable. The 18× collateral means the claim is well-backed; the caps mean it's redeemed in an orderly way, not all at once. "Available" (the claim) and "callable this second" (throughput) aren't meant to be the same number, and right now the window buffer is thin; that's accurate.
On the TVL optics: fair. A raw $TVL can read like a hard-dollar pool to anyone not looking closely. That's exactly why the swap-depth-vs-backing split matters and why the treasury itemises it live, the label isn't wrong, but I agree it's easy to misread without the context.
On the UST1 mark: I don't put one on it. My LUNC→USTC route is cLUNC/cUSTC, 1:1 native wraps, treasury-custodied, marked at the live LUNC/USTC price. UST1 isn't in that path. If UST1 were charted anywhere, the honest mark is its live price, not an assumed $1, it's an unstablecoin, not a hard peg.
And agreed on WESO: the WESO/LUNC book is a separate market from the cwLUNC/cwUSTC route, which is exactly why it isn't in a LUNC/USTC comparison.
Scrutiny cuts both ways, and I welcome it in either direction. I'll run any venue through the same on-chain lens, WESO's bonding curve included, and publish it fairly. Happy to, if that's the standard we're setting.
LVS retweeted
CL8Y DEX has seen some truly amazing growth in such a short space of time! It regularly tops the charts for DEX volume. Very impressive 🔥🔥🔥
#LUNC #CL8Y #USTC
1/ 📊 State of CL8Y DEX — Week 8
Seven days ago, the venue was doing around $600/day in volume.
Yesterday: ~$6,200.
Growth is starting to accelerate. 👇
dex.cl8y.com
#LUNC #USTC #CL8Y #TerraClassic
LVS retweeted
4/ 🔥 The number we watch hardest: tax-free share.
On Sunday, 12.0% of chain CW20 activity moved through wrapped LUNC/USTC, a new record.
That is real adoption.
Wrap once. Trade without repeatedly paying the native burn tax.
dex.cl8y.com
Week 8, and still a long way from the ceiling. 🚀
#LUNC #USTC #CL8Y #TerraClassic #Crypto
LVS retweeted
Thanks for the address; I checked it on-chain. terra13ryrr… is a cw20_bonding contract: token_info returns "WESO Token", and it answers curve_info, not pool/pair. It's the WESO token bonding curve, exactly the "bonded amount" you mentioned.
Its reserve denom is LUNC (uluna), and it holds zero USTC (cwUSTC balance: 0). A LUNC→USTC trade needs USTC on the other side; there's none in it, so by definition it can't be a LUNC/USTC pair. It's a LUNC→WESO mint curve.
The only WESO contract that holds both cwLUNC and cwUSTC, the one route a LUNC→USTC swap can actually pass through, is the cwLUNC/cwUSTC AMM pool terra1l7yt…, and it holds ~$177. That's what the tool read. WESO is excluded not because I read the bonded amount, but because that two-sided LUNC/USTC pool is only ~$177.
That's the whole distinction: LUNC collateral backing the WESO token (real, and yours) vs. tradeable LUNC↔USTC liquidity. Collateral can't fill a swap. If there's a pool holding both LUNC/cwLUNC and USTC/cwUSTC with real depth, send that one and I'll add it today — but this contract holds no USTC, so it isn't it.
All verifiable in seconds: token_info / curve_info on that contract, and a balance query for its cwUSTC.
LVS retweeted
🚨 @Greenpeace06_09 - 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗚𝗢𝗡𝗘 𝗕𝗘𝗬𝗢𝗡𝗗 𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗔𝗚𝗥𝗘𝗘𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 🚨
You have now publicly accused me of being a “𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗿” and claimed that my credibility was “destroyed” because I was supposedly “exposed”.
Those are extremely serious allegations about my character and reputation.
So here is your opportunity:
𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗗𝗨𝗖𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗩𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘.
Show the #LUNC community exactly who I have scammed, what I supposedly did, when I did it and the evidence proving it.
Who I follow is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 evidence.
Who blocks me is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 evidence.
Guilt by association is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 evidence.
Your personal opinion is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 evidence.
The Lunanauts → StatsBin rebrand was public. I have never attempted to conceal who operates the validator.
If you cannot substantiate your accusation that I am a scammer, 𝗜 𝗮𝗺 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗽 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁.
I am also preserving screenshots and records of these statements.
If these allegations continue, I will consider obtaining legal advice regarding 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗮𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻/𝗹𝗶𝗯𝗲𝗹 and the appropriate remedies available to protect my reputation.
You don't get to repeatedly brand someone a criminal or scammer on social media without being prepared to substantiate what you're publishing.
Criticise my votes.
Criticise StatsBin.
Criticise my validator.
But if you're going to publicly call me a 𝗦𝗖𝗔𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗥, bring the evidence.
𝗣𝗨𝗧 𝗨𝗣 𝗢𝗥 𝗥𝗘𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧 𝗜𝗧.
#LUNC #TerraClassic #StatsBin #USTC
LVS retweeted
🚨 𝐖𝐇𝐘 𝐈𝐒 𝐀 𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐘 𝐃𝐎𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐖𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐄𝐓 𝐁𝐄𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐔𝐒𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐎 𝐕𝐎𝐓𝐄 𝐎𝐍 #𝐋𝐔𝐍𝐂 𝐆𝐎𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐍𝐀𝐍𝐂𝐄?
@Greenpeace06_09 describes this address as a charity donation wallet for St. Jude:
"terra1fh3wqdhna92lzrgcp8cqk0xe89xcygmp4vqrcp"
Yet the on-chain record shows that on 25 September 2026 this wallet 𝐝𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐍𝐎 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐕𝐄𝐓𝐎 on Proposal #12228.
The wallet itself was the 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫, 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫, 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐞𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫.
It even attached the memo:
“Scammer proposal to take 21 percent of lunc from CP”
TX:
E2D4E8B36472F56E185C0037EDB2F3A1AC2A0BE89DDE6A3C779B3B80E4497E29
If a wallet is presented to the community as holding 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, why is that same wallet being used for unrelated Terra Classic governance activity?
The transaction fee itself was only 1.920096 LUNC. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 - 𝐢𝐭'𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲.
A wallet soliciting or holding funds described as charity donations should, in my view, be kept completely separate from personal #LUNC governance activity.
@Greenpeace06_09 - can you explain why this charity donation wallet was used to cast this vote?
#LUNC #TerraClassic #USTC
LVS retweeted
📊 LeonardoLUNC.org September 1.5% TAX update
Month 2 of the 1.5% $LUNC burn-tax test is complete.
The higher rate is still generating more tax than the estimated 0.5% counterfactual, while taxable on-chain activity remains well below the pre-change benchmark.
🔬 NEW: LUNC DEX Simulator
Thanks to @Lunc_Universe for the suggestion, a new measurement tool has now been added to help answer a different question:
When I trade LUNC → USTC, what does the 1.5% chain tax actually cost me?
Enter a trade size and number of round trips, and the simulator compares available venues using:
• Live Columbus-5 pool reserves
• Actual AMM and tax calculations
• On-chain measured fees
• A $50k minimum liquidity rule
Every route starts and finishes in your own wallet, including Binance, so exchange deposits and withdrawals are treated as on-chain transfers rather than assuming a CEX is automatically tax-free.
This makes it easy to see the difference between an occasional trade and repeated trading, where the 1.5% tax can compound significantly across multiple legs.
Put in your own numbers and see the result.
So, September closed with the 1.5% tax generating ~63% more revenue than the 0.5% counterfactual, while taxable volume remained ~49% below the pre-change benchmark, still inside the ~67% breakeven threshold.
Month 2 done; 4 more to go 🙂
🔍 leonardolunc.org
#LUNC #TerraClassic #USTC #DeFi #OnChainData
LVS retweeted
🚀 The next stage of liquidity expansion for CL8Y DEX is being built.
To expand liquidity further, the CMM will be able to utilise bridge assets to create CMM-owned leveraged LP positions on CL8Y DEX.
But leverage requires transparency and strict accounting.
Before deploying this, the infrastructure needs to ensure:
🔒 Bridge assets remain 1:1 backed
📊 Debt is fully tracked and visible
⚖️ Leverage cannot unintentionally exceed expected levels
💧 CMM-owned liquidity can scale safely
Step 1 is now live. ✅
The CMM Treasury dashboard now tracks lock/unlock balances on BSC, currently covering USDT and CL8Y, with more assets to come:
🔗 ust1cmm.com/treasury
Next step: debt tokens.
When the CMM receives tokens minted 1:1 on Terra Classic through the CL8Y Bridge, corresponding debt tokens will be issued to the CMM, making that bridge liability visible and trackable.
This creates the accounting infrastructure needed before bridge assets can safely be used to expand CMM-owned liquidity.
Bridge ➡️ CMM ➡️ Liquidity ➡️ Fees ➡️ Growth
Another piece of the infrastructure being put in place before scaling. 🏗️
🔗 CL8Y DEX: dex.cl8y.com
🌉 Bridge: bridge.cl8y.com
📊 CMM Treasury: ust1cmm.com/treasury
#CL8Y #LUNC #USTC #TerraClassic #DeFi
LVS retweeted
To expand the liquidity on cl8y dex, the CMM will be able to utilize bridge assets to create CMM owned leveraged lp positions. However, doing so requires extennsive tracking of debt & visibility so that the CMM always prioritizes bridge 1:1 backing and doesnt accidentally create more leverage than expected. For the first step, ust1cmm.com/treasury now tracks the lock/unlock balances of tokens on BSC, currently just $USDT and CL8Y but more to come. The next step is adding debt tokens issued by the bridge to the CMM, that the CMM is issued whenever it receives minted tokens on terraclassic from the bridge 1:1. - CF
On staking, the purpose of staking is to attract more capital to the CMM it can then deploy to generate ROI higher than the APR on the staking. Currently the CMM isn't using all its available capital, so we first need to scale liquidity and/or release new apps that need capital before starting staking. Based on analysis of IL and our fee data, we can increase existing liquidity further to generate more ROI profitably with our existing CL8Y Dex, so that is likely the best way to scale up. It may take up to 90 days for us to deploy our existing CMM capital - currently we are only at 0.55x capital utilization, and we can likely push that to 2.0x before we need to start bringing in more capital to scale further. - CF
LVS retweeted
The abuse of VETO on a genuine #LUNC proposal just shows the malicious actors in this community.
For reference to #LUNC delegators, they can see who abuses VETO here:
statsbin.com/veto-watch
#BINANCE #USTC
LVS retweeted
Absolutely, two years of building, and CL8Y DEX is just one part of Ceramic’s wider plan to restore value for USTC holders. 🔥
The DEX helps build the financial foundation for another USTC → USTR conversion window: deeper liquidity, trading activity and revenue to support the next stage.
In my view, USTR reaching $0.15 would be an encouraging signal, provided that growth is supported by strong treasury reserves and sustainable revenue.
That would put us in a stronger position to welcome more USTC holders into the ecosystem and absorb more USTC into the treasury.
An amazing start, with plenty still to build. 🚀