Support design & dev. of Terra-Classic.money v2.0

General
1

TL;DR

Terra-Classic.money v2.0 is a full, institution-ready website for Terra Classic: clear onboarding for investors/stakers, builders, and institutions—with a modern brand narrative, guided CTAs, and conversion-focused information architecture.

  • Goal: Finish design + build + launch v2.0

  • Time needed: ~1 month of full-time work

  • Budget: €6,000 (~$7,000) for production + $400/year Framer Pro (hosting/ops)

  • Donate: wallets below

  • Proof: v1.0 already became the canonical “front door” for Terra Classic discovery and captured meaningful global traffic organically (details below).

SM - 52
SM - 521176×1176 200 KB

1) Terra-Classic.money v1.0 — why it existed (and what it solved)

SM - 59
SM - 591176×1176 157 KB

For years, Terra Classic did not have a dedicated, canonical website destination that could serve as a single source of truth for:

  • first-time discovery,

  • ecosystem navigation (apps/markets/tools),

  • and consistent external linking from third-party platforms.

As a result, user discovery was fragmented and, in many cases, misdirected—reducing Terra Classic’s ability to convert interest into action (wallet installs, staking, app usage, developer onboarding, institutional outreach).

Terra-Classic.money v1.0 was created to solve that specific distribution problem:

a simple, structured hub that people can land on, understand where they are, and move to the next step.

It was intentionally lightweight—more “advanced link hub” than “full protocol website”—because the priority was to establish a canonical front door fast.

1.2) v1.0 performance — results (what actually happened)

SM - 58
SM - 581176×1176 170 KB

Even without a dedicated marketing campaign, v1.0 performed exactly as a canonical discovery hub should: it captured existing demand and redirected users into the Terra Classic ecosystem.

From Google Analytics:

  • ~42k active users

  • ~43k new users

  • ~90k page views

  • ~74k sessions

  • ~45s average engagement time

  • Strong global distribution (top countries included United States, Türkiye, Indonesia, India, Thailand, China, Brazil)

The early-December spike (proof that attention converts into massive traffic)

At the very beginning of December, Terra-Classic.money experienced its largest traffic anomaly in the recorded period—an “attention shock” that demonstrates what happens when Terra Classic becomes a mainstream talking point.

Analytics flagged a sudden surge in active users around Nov 30 / early December:

  • Expected: ~1,052 active users

  • Actual: ~5,509 active users

  • Lift: +423.7% (anomaly detected)

This spike aligns with a viral moment during Binance Blockchain Week, when a widely shared on-stage meme (the session moderator wearing a “LUNA” shirt) pulled a wave of attention back toward Terra Classic keywords and conversation across social channels.

Why this matters: v1.0 did not “create” demand—it caught demand when it appeared. And because Terra Classic had a working canonical destination, that attention translated into measurable traffic rather than disappearing into fragmented links and third-party confusion.

In other words: when interest rises, a proper website amplifies the outcome. That is precisely why v2.0 is the next logical step—so future attention spikes don’t just produce visits, but also convert into:

  • wallet installs and staking participation,

  • app discovery and usage,

  • developer onboarding,

  • and institutional inquiries.

Important note: We are missing tracking data from the first month of the site’s existence—when initial community discovery and ecosystem sharing created a meaningful surge. Additionally, Terra Classic governance later formalized the website as a reference destination for third-party linking, which reinforced v1.0’s role as the community’s canonical front door.

Net result: v1.0 succeeded at its mission—people who previously landed in the wrong place (or could not find a destination at all) now have a clear, Terra Classic–specific entry point.

1.3) Why a website does not automatically equal traffic (and why v2.0 still matters)

A website is not a marketing campaign. It is the conversion surface that marketing and organic discovery need in order to work.

v1.0 captured:

  • organic interest,

  • direct visits,

  • community sharing,

  • and third-party referral demand.

But without coordinated growth initiatives, you will not see the full ceiling of potential traffic. That does not mean the hub failed—only that the ecosystem has not yet activated systematic distribution.

v2.0 is designed to convert the demand that already exists into the outcomes that matter:

  • more staking participation,

  • more app usage,

  • higher developer throughput,

  • and more institutional inquiries.

2) Terra-Classic.money v2.0 — why Terra Classic needs a real website now

SM - 54
SM - 541176×1176 201 KB

v1.0 was a necessary step. v2.0 is the strategic upgrade.

A serious Layer-1 needs a serious digital presence—on par with other L1 ecosystems—because the website is where:

  • investors decide whether a network is alive and credible,

  • developers decide whether onboarding will be smooth,

  • and institutions decide whether outreach is worth initiating.

v1.0 does not (and was never designed to) provide:

  • clear, structured “What is Terra Classic?” content,

  • guided paths for Users / Developers / Businesses / Organizations / Institutions,

  • explanations of core L1 components (Staking Protocol, Forex Protocol, stable asset direction, ecosystem map),

  • strong brand narrative and future-forward positioning,

  • FAQ that reduces repetitive support load,

  • a clean contact surface for serious external parties,

  • a modern, trust-building visual system.

v2.0 will provide:

SM - 55
SM - 551176×1176 201 KB

SM - 56
SM - 561176×1176 156 KB

  • a polished, conversion-oriented homepage (already designed),

  • subpages that explain Terra Classic simply and professionally,

  • ecosystem navigation that highlights what is live today and what is evolving,

  • institutional-grade clarity (without hype),

  • and a unified narrative aligned with Terra Classic’s differentiator:

    decentralization as a feature, not a slogan.

2.2) Project status (what’s done vs. what’s left)

SM - 57
SM - 571176×1176 211 KB

SM - 53
SM - 531176×1176 310 KB

Done

  • Lo-fi wireframes (full site structure)

  • Home page copy (Complete content + FAQ)

  • Home page desktop design (v2.0) — completed

Figma link (wireframes + v2.0 design):

Not done yet

  • Home page responsive design: small desktop / tablet / mobile versions

  • Subpage UI design (3–4 resolutions each)

  • Subpage content (final copy across pages)

  • Framer development (implementation)

  • QA pass (performance, accessibility basics, launch checklist)

Time needed to finish

  • ~1 month of full-time work

**2.3) Funding support needed: **

SM - 52
SM - 521176×1176 200 KB

To complete v2.0:

  1. €6,000 (~$7,000) — remuneration for one month of full-time work to finish design + build + launch

  2. $400 — Framer Pro subscription for 12 months (hosting/ops)

This is a lean budget for a full redesign + production build that will serve as Terra Classic’s primary onboarding surface.

Donation addresses

LUNC:

terra1yerplv7hshr5w2mpa2em0knlx3dm6aln9fwj2m

BTC (Native SegWit):

bc1q4vevf342hszd367c5n5qf24f7heek04w5zmsv4

BNB:

0x44Db62D8c5507952c2cFBD2F232A975950789E26

Attribution (optional)

If you want to be credited on the “About Terra-Classic.money” page:

  • include your handle/name in the memo/message (where your wallet supports it), or

  • reply in this thread with: “Donated + your handle” (you can DM me instead if you prefer privacy).

If you prefer to stay anonymous, donate with no memo and do not comment.

Recognition + transparency

All donors (unless they opt out) will be listed on an “About Terra-Classic.money” supporters section—similar in spirit to how major open-source and public-good websites (About bitcoin.org) recognize contributors.

In addition:

  • weekly progress updates in this thread,

  • a public “v2.0 shipped” delivery summary (what was delivered, what remains, what’s next),

Links

Closing

Terra Classic already has the fundamentals: decentralization, builders, ecosystems, and global stakeholders. What it needs now is a credible, future-forward front door that turns attention into participation.

If you believe Terra Classic should present itself at the level of top L1s, please consider supporting v2.0—either via donation or by amplifying this thread.

If you donate, comment “Done” (and optionally your handle for attribution).

4 Likes
2

It is indeed sad that we’re in this situation where CP has $800k, but a community member needs to ‘beg’ for funding to improve the “official terra classic webpage”. But here we are.

”gib me repeg first and then i will pai, scamer”

Anyway, good luck. I’m sure you will do a great job if you ever get to that. Projects like terracasino and BIA (who do the monthly burns) should better divert the $ to support this initiative than burn. These burns mean nothing anyway.

3 Likes
3

We needed this.

Until now, our website was a landing page — a good starting point, but not enough for a blockchain that aims to be taken seriously in today’s crypto market. To attract new investors, builders, and users, credibility matters.

A professional, full website is essential:

  • A single official source of truth for Terra Classic

  • Clear, transparent information about LUNC

  • Protection against scam and phishing websites

  • A place where investors can research with confidence

Now, we finally can have a website we can proudly share.

One that reflects maturity, seriousness, and long-term vision.

This is how you build trust.

This is how you grow adoption.

This is how Terra Classic moves forward.

6 Likes
4

This was a huge step to create v1 and has finally funneled interest into the lunc ecosystem which was barely visible before. So what v1 achieved was huge for lunc and to those building on lunc like myself.

This next step, however, will open the site up to further explain, expand and promote the ecosystem we are working hard for. I’m a firm believer that all the burns in the world won’t attract people to a baron wasteland. People are attracted to flourishing, progressing ecosystems and that’s what lunc is under the surface. This next website upgrade should really make life easier for newcomers to discover this.

2 Likes
5

Binance burn a lot of LUNC, price goes up, a lot of attention to Terra Classic - I think it’s a good time to improve web-page, but cool to act fast

Maybe not only donations, but also up the proposal to funding this web-page from the Community Pool ?

3 Likes
6

Firstly, I was also an early supporter, and secondly, the crucial aspect is representation at trade fairs, etc. The experiences of the Summit, for example in Berlin, definitely left the impression that a live, on-site presentation and explanation of the web presence is essential and simultaneously opens the doors to our inner ecosystem.

So, yes, I support this initiative.

2 Likes
7

I am for it.

If you can get the price down - great.

If you can’t - fine.

We need this utility for the blockchain and it has shown that it attracts interest during volatility. It offers us analytical information and makes us look professional.

The chain needs to go all in now on several frontlines, and I totally trust Dawid with the task of this one.

I also concur with the statement of Rocket that we need to find different ways to finance initiatives like this in the future.

3 Likes
8

As a Terra Classic validator (Uncode Lounge), I support initiatives that aim to strengthen the ecosystem’s clarity, credibility, and accessibility.

Terra-Classic.money v2.0 has the potential to become a clean, institution-ready front door for Terra Classic. Something the ecosystem clearly needs.

Improving design, structure, and messaging is not about marketing hype, but about making Terra Classic easier to understand for developers, partners, and external observers.

I encourage the community to review this initiative and engage in the discussion constructively.

1 Like
9

For Luna Classic to continue evolving as an ecosystem, it is essential to understand that technology and development alone do not guarantee adoption. Visibility, communication, and strategic positioning are decisive factors in attracting new users, developers, and investors.

A professional, well-structured, and constantly improved website is the main entry point to the ecosystem. It centralizes official information, reduces noise, combats misinformation, and conveys institutional credibility to the market. In addition, an optimized website directly impacts essential metrics such as SEO, user retention, conversion rate, and engagement.

Investing in technical and data-driven marketing allows Luna Classic to expand its reach to larger and more qualified audiences. Well-defined strategies increase organic traffic, strengthen the brand, improve value perception, and create a sustainable funnel for new participants to enter the ecosystem.

Luna Classic has a technical foundation, track record, and active community. The next step is to align this strength with a professional marketing and digital presence strategy, ensuring sustainable growth, transparency, and competitiveness in the crypto market. That is why I support this improvement initiative 100%.

10

1. Broken commitment
Your first proposal explicitly stated: “The author of the site refrains from making future requests for funding for the development of this site.”

This was added because the community was concerned about being locked into future payments once CMC redirected to a privately-held domain (by you). Now we’re being asked for €6,000 + $400/year ongoing costs, directly contradicting that commitment.

https://common.xyz/terra-luna-classic-lunc/discussion/1265099-proposal-for-updating-terra-classic-lunc-and-ustc-profiles-on-third-party-websites

  1. We already have terra-classic.io
    StrathCole has built https://terra-classic.io/ which includes:
    Updated documentation (the same docs v2.0 plans to integrat")
    Ecosystem resources (apps, tools, wallets, validators)
    Community contribution model (anyone can contribute)
    No funding

  2. Attribution concern
    The v2 will use StrathCole’s docs as the “canonical source” and integrate them into the new site. So we’d be paying €6,000 to wrap someone else’s community work in a new design—without compensating the actual docs creator.

  3. What we voted for
    We voted to list terra-classic.money (v1) on CMC, a lightweight website that solved the problem of having a canonical front door. If v2 is a different site with different scope and infrastructure, is that still what we voted for? Or should that be a new governance decision?

Alternative proposal:
Instead of spending €6,000 on a redesign, why not simply redirect terra-classic.money to terra-classic.io?
• Cost: €0
• Timeline: A few days
• Result: Users get consolidated, community-maintained resources
• Bonus: StrathCole’s site already has the docs and ecosystem info that v2.0 promises to add

3 Likes
11

@Whisper

Thanks for laying out your concerns. I’ll respond point-by-point with facts, because several claims here materially mischaracterize what was proposed, what was voted on, and what is being asked now.

1) “Broken commitment” / funding

You quoted a line from the original governance proposal: “The author of the site refrains from making future requests for funding for the development of this site.” That line was included to reassure the community that v1 would not become an ongoing, mandatory obligation once third-party links were updated.

Two important clarifications:

• I have honoured that commitment for v1. The site has been live and maintained without a governance spend request.

• The current initiative is not a governance spend request and not an obligation. It is a voluntary donation campaign for a major v2 upgrade (expanded scope, improved onboarding, stronger IA, multilingual, integrated docs experience, brand system, etc.).

Also, the way you framed it (“Now we’re being asked for €6,000 + $400/year ongoing costs”) implies an enforced payment model. That is inaccurate. There is no compulsory payment. I’m asking for voluntary support - not creating a tax.

2) “We already have terra-classic.io” / contribution model

I respect any community member building resources for Terra Classic, and I’m not here to diminish that work. But two claims in this section need correction.

(a) “Community contribution model” is not magically different

terra-classic.io does not mean “anyone can change production.” It means anyone can propose changes via GitHub, and then reviewers/maintainers decide whether it ships. Strath himself described that model plainly (three approvals out of five, then merge). That is a reasonable model, but it is not meaningfully different in governance terms from “public intake + maintainer review.” It’s a different workflow, not a fundamentally different decentralization level.

(b) terra-classic.io and terra-classic.money are not equivalent products

terra-classic.io explicitly positions itself as a community-curated resource hub (“Everything you need to explore, build and stake…”), with live signals, lists of tools/resources, and FAQs.

That is useful, but it is not the same thing as an institution-ready front door with a coherent brand narrative, guided onboarding paths (investor/staker/builder/institution), conversion-focused information architecture, and consistent presentation for third parties and press.

My v2 work is explicitly targeting that “front door” role: narrative + onboarding + trust-building + clarity + structure. A resource directory alone does not solve that.

3) “Attribution concern” / Strath’s docs

On docs: I’ve been clear that StrathCole’s docs will be used as the canonical source because having two competing documentation sets is confusing and harmful for users. If those docs are the best available resource, duplicating or rewriting them would be wasteful and misleading.

Attribution is not a problem; it’s a requirement. v2 will:

• Credit the docs author clearly

• Link directly to the canonical docs source

• Preserve authorship and provenance

But the suggestion that v2 is “paying €6,000 to wrap someone else’s work in a new design” is a misrepresentation of what v2 actually is. v2 is not “docs + theme.” It is a full front-door product upgrade: IA, user journeys, onboarding flows, multilingual structure, integrated docs experience, brand system, content design, and a maintainable CMS implementation.

Also, the criticism is internally inconsistent: I’m being attacked for seeking any compensation for product work, while simultaneously being told that Strath must be compensated for docs. Either compensation for serious contributions is acceptable in principle, or it isn’t. My position is consistent: high-quality work has real cost, and it’s reasonable to fund it transparently - especially when it materially improves Terra Classic’s public credibility.

4) “What we voted for” / governance scope

This part needs the cleanest factual correction.

The governance proposal that passed was specifically about changing third-party “website” links (CoinMarketCap and other third-party profiles) to point to terra-classic.money, because the existing link landscape was outdated and harmful.

It did not:

• make terra-classic.money the “official Terra Classic website,”

• transfer ownership/custody of the website to validators/governance,

• create an approval requirement for every website iteration.

So yes: I have the technical ability to change the site (as for example maintainers of official Terra Classic Github can change anything in Terra Classic code in other contexts), but I operate that responsibility conservatively because credibility matters. The claim that I’m “basically saying I will make whatever changes I like without any community approval” is inflammatory framing, not an accurate description of how I’ve acted.

If anyone believes the canonical destination should change to a different domain or custody model, that is a separate governance question that should be proposed explicitly - with an operating model, maintainers, SLAs, security assumptions, and a migration plan.

“Alternative proposal: redirect terra-classic.money → terra-classic.io”

If the community wants to change the canonical destination from terra-classic.money to another domain, that should indeed be handled through a formal governance proposal. That said, I do not believe a redirect to terra-classic.io is the best solution for Terra Classic for several reasons:

• It is not a like-for-like replacement. The two sites serve different product goals: terra-classic.io is positioned as a community resource hub; v2 of terra-classic.money is designed as an institution-ready “front door” with guided onboarding, narrative, trust-building, and conversion-focused information architecture. Apart of this it will also include resource hub page (improved version of what terra-classic.money is today)

• It introduces real transition cost and risk. Even if a governance vote passes, a redirect/migration requires a careful plan (SEO continuity, analytics continuity, content parity, uptime responsibility, security, and a comms plan for the 50–100 third parties that were already instructed to link to .money). That is not “a few days” in any serious implementation.

• “Cost €0” is not an adequate evaluation criterion for a mission-critical public asset. The cost may not be requested from the community, but it still exists in time, maintenance, infrastructure, review overhead, and reputation risk.

For the avoidance of doubt: I’m not opposed to collaboration or to governance deciding a different direction. I’m opposed to treating a domain redirect as a trivial swap when the product goals, operating model, and risk profile are materially different.

Transparency note

Since you are posting this as a stakeholder in the validator ecosystem: for readers’ context, Whisper is affiliated with GalacticShift.io validator, and the alternative site being promoted was built by StrathCole, who is founder of GalacticShift.io validator. That does not invalidate your opinion, but it is a relevant conflict-of-interest disclosure when advocating a redirect to that asset.

Where I stand (simple)

• v1 remains live and has delivered measurable results.

• v2 is time-boxed upgrade, funded via voluntary donations, not a governance spend obligation.

• Docs will be consolidated (not duplicated) and properly attributed.

• After v2 ships, I’m open to defining a stewardship model that improves continuity and contribution workflow - without degrading quality and trust.

13

SM - 60
SM - 601176×1176 154 KB

Quality-of-life update on http://terra-classic.money:

  1. Maintanance via Github - GitHub - Terra-Classic-money-Website/Terra-Classic.money: Github reposytory for Terra-Classic.money website that will allow Terra-Classic community members to to easily submit suggestions for changes.

We’re in the process of implementing Github as transparent tool that will allow members of the #TerraClassic community to suggest changes to the site.

The tool will be fully operational in the coming days.

  1. Independent maintainers have been assigned:

I am pleased to announce that @ponimajushij @DonLunc @WhalliamFrond & El_PACO_LUNC have agreed to help evaluate the merits of changes suggested by the Terra Classic community.

These are people who are not validators on Terra Classic, which eliminates the conflict of interest.