Перейти к содержанию
TelegramInformer
Открыть в Telegram
Подписчики
779
24 часа
−2
7 дней
–
30 дней
–
Средний охват поста
–
Пока мало данных
Вовлечённость
–
Пока мало данных
Постов в день
0,1
В среднем за 30 дней
Упоминания
0
Другими каналами за 90 дней
Реакции на просмотры (ER)
6,05 %
Реакции ÷ просмотры, 30 дней
В среднем на пост
Реакции
27
Репосты
–
Комментарии
–
Индекс цитирования
–
Другие каналы не цитировали его за 30 дней
Рекламные посты
0 %
0 из 4 постов за 30 дней помечены как реклама

Динамика подписчиков

Подписчиков у канала «JESUSisLORD Validator»: 779.

По дням, последние 30 дней
Дата Подписчики Изменение Посты Ср. просмотры поста
12 ноя 779 −2 0 –
11 ноя 781 0 0 –
10 ноя 781 0 1 144
9 ноя 781 −6 0 –
17 окт 787 – 0 –

Когда публикует

Время по UTC. 12 постов за 90 дней.

Последние посты

  1. Открыть пост

    I have voted no with veto on LUNC governance proposal #12236. This proposal is for Juris Protocol's wallet to be whitelisted for complete permission to upload CosmWasm code to the chain. Recently a proposal was passed to restrict uploads to the chain due to an exploit affecting Cosmos chains, and Juris is seeking a whitelisting. I have voted against this proposal for numerous reasons including that the Juris team is opposed to the burn tax and voted against it, and against other proposals that would have been good for the chain, and therefore I will not support them.

    144 просмотров 26 Реакции
  2. Открыть пост

    I have voted no with veto on LUNC governance proposal #12235. There are proposed code changes with no discussion proposal and a justification that seems clearly like a scam and an attack on the chain.

    348 просмотров 29 Реакции
  3. Открыть пост

    I have voted yes on LUNC governance proposal #12234 which is a parameter change to restrict the uploading of contracts, as presently arbitrary contract bytecode can be uploaded on chain, presenting a potential security issue.

    557 просмотров 29 Реакции
  4. Открыть пост

    I have voted yes for LUNC governance proposal #12233, which is for a chain upgrade to fix a bug involving stuck transactions, and some minor preventative fixes. I have voted no on LUNC governance proposal #12232 which is for payment for the implementation of Hyperlane. I opposed every proposal relating to the approval and implementation of Hyperlane, so I also oppose payment for its implementation.

    702 просмотров 22 Реакции
  5. Открыть пост

    I have voted no on LUNC governance proposals #12229 and #12230 which are for transfer of Hyperlane contracts, including to community control (and responsibility). I did not support the Hyperlane proposal when it was first voted on, as I do not support making fake LUNC on other chains (wrapped LUNC) https://t.me/JESUSisLORDValidator/386. Bridges of LUNC to other chains are also a security risk which can cause minting with exploits that have occurred on other chains. None of these contracts have been audited. I also do not trust the proposer, among other important reasons for my vote.

    799 просмотров 36 Реакции
  6. Открыть пост

    I have voted yes for LUNC governance proposal #12228 for a Terra Classic security audit by SolidProof, with implementation of fixes by OrbitLabs. This will be a great opportunity to enhance the security of the chain and limit potential delisting risk. You can track the vote for this proposal at this link: https://validator.info/terra-classic/governance/12228

    841 просмотров 28 Реакции
  7. Открыть пост

    I have voted yes on LUNC governance proposal #12227, which is to upgrade and patch the chain with an important security fix to address a vulnerability disclosed by Cosmos.

    886 просмотров 31 Реакции
  8. Открыть пост

    I have prepared a proposal for a Terra Classic security audit with implementation of fixes you can read over here https://discourse.luncgoblins.com/t/proposal-terra-classic-security-audit-by-solidproof-fixes-by-orbitlabs/536

    852 просмотров 29 Реакции
  9. Открыть пост

    I have voted yes on LUNC proposal #12226 which is to move the USDC from the LUNC/USDC pools through IBC to Injective, then back on the chain into the same kind of pools. The reason is that Noble USDC will no longer be supported on Cosmos, so the stablecoin will become unbacked soon, and it needs to be replaced with USDC which is issued on Injective. Essentially the proposal is required to keep the value of the USDC which the community funded in proposal #12171 https://t.me/JESUSisLORDValidator/346.

    778 просмотров 28 Реакции
  10. Открыть пост

    I have voted no on LUNC governance proposal #12225, which is to fund Frag to supply IBC relaying services for Osmosis, Noble and Axelar for around $14,100 USD for 6 months. I don't believe this is worthwhile investment for the chain to fund from the community pool. IBC transactions do not incur fees or tax for the chain, and Noble is ending support for USDC. You can see my vote on the prior similar proposal here https://t.me/JESUSisLORDValidator/367.

    898 просмотров 28 Реакции

Вопросы о канале «JESUSisLORD Validator»

Сколько подписчиков у канала «JESUSisLORD Validator»?

У канала «JESUSisLORD Validator» (@jesusislordvalidator) 779 подписчиков на 12 ноября 2026 г.

О чём канал «JESUSisLORD Validator»?

Канал в категории «Криптовалюты», язык постов: английский. Описание канала: «JESUSisLORD LUNC validator»

Какое место занимает канал «JESUSisLORD Validator»?

По числу подписчиков: №764 в категории «Криптовалюты», №8 671 среди каналов на языке «английский», №9 715 в мире.

Когда публикует канал «JESUSisLORD Validator»?

Пик публикаций: воскресенье, около 02:00 по UTC. Выходит около 4 постов в месяц.

Статистика обновлена 15 минут назад.