[bhaak]

Terra was no stable coin. It was pointed out constantly that it can't work as an algorithmic stable coin. But the shill army was strong.

There's an even easier metric for measuring crypto project. The bigger and dumber the shill army the more shady the project.

[icu]

Thanks for your comment. Any chance you could please point me to the sources that constantly pointed out it wouldn't work?

[bhaak]

Besides Reddit, Crypto Twitter was very vocal.

So vocal in fact that the man himself was quite annoyed to constantly being told that UST can't be stable: https://twitter.com/stablekwon/status/1462063962506338318

Do Kwon in general was a red flag. There are a lot of strong opinioned and self confident people in crypto. But when the representative of the crypto project is a toxic participant of the space, you should think really hard about putting your money into such a project.

For example: https://twitter.com/stablekwon/status/1396735774737928192 (note, this tweet was after the whole disaster, losing billions weren't a humbling experience for him).

If you decide to put money into crypto you need to do your own risk management. I especially look how dissenting voices are treated.

A good starting point is Eric Wall https://twitter.com/ercwl. He's not a maximalist of any coins and as such is often very critical of projects and gets a lot of flak for this even though he usually has a thorough explanation how he gets to his conclusions.

[zeven7]

If you're looking for a place with a community you can ask about those things I recommend, /r/ethfinance. I decided against using Celsius after asking around about it there. There's also been good discussion about what makes a good stablecoin over the years. Hint: Stables like DAI are a completely different thing from what Terra was.

[icu]

Thanks. I also evaluated Celsius (and others) but decided that I couldn't determine counterparty risk after reading their terms and conditions. In the end I stayed away because of that.