We already have a few existing posts under “Preliminary Improvement Proposition” regarding burns, but I wanted to create a general post where we can all congregate to nail down the specifics before a formal proposal is introduced.
Please contribute your best ideas and well thought out opinions below so that we may move towards reaching a consensus decision on this issue.
Potential points of discussion
Scale (amount to be burned)
Source (which tokens are we burning)
Timing
Rewards (how does this burn affect APY, smaller stakers, etc)
Statistics
3.2 billion circulating supply / 10 billion total supply
Since 36% of rewards are currently going unclaimed, I would propose to rediatrubute them to active members of community who stake and regulary claim their rewards.
This solution would benefit community and reward active participants of this project. Also this will attract new active members with more money to spend on project.
you want to keep the system exactly like it is now, or are there differences in your proposition? Because currently the mentinoned rollover rewards are distributed to all stakers in the next week.
Hey there, as a vast majority seem to agree to redefine unclaimed rewards system, I wanted to introduce a suggestion from @ark on our discord server, where:
25% of unclaimed rewards would be burned
25% would go to DAO reserve
50% would be redistributed among all stakers
I also support the measure. I think it’s a very reasonable compromise. Lowers inflation rate, staking remains worthwhile for most, increase in DAO funds, plus we can market the fact that were burning tokens. Seems like a W to me.
This is how we work together to find consensus on big issues! You love to see it.
I have an idea that I don’t believe has been suggested: why don’t we take a bit of the DAO’s $LINA allocation and pay a professional economist to review the numbers and make a recommendation?
Thankfully there are some genuine professionals in the twittersphere. However that level of “influencer” tends to be more expensive. Is anyone a college professor, or student and have a solid relationship with a financial professor?
We have had some very interesting conversation on this in both discord and telegram channel.
Staking rewards long term holders.
Burn helps short term/current holders.
burn might see the price pump temporarily, but the same uplift can be felt for hodlers in the long term with more tokens (even though their price might remain low) in circulation with current token rewards weekly.
On the other hand - Chaos and other token drop should normally benefit current holders (more recency bias). meaning, we should not try to reward someone who had 10 million lina tokens 5 months back but has 1 million only today. it should be the other way. since the total amount to be distributed would be fixed - it can simply be distributed proportionally to current stakers (% of current tokens staked)
Considering before we reach an agreement and hypothethically assuming this one will go through implementation could kick in April. So 8 months left from 2022 + 12 months of the 2023 + 6 months of 2024 as rewards program should end by than. 26 months x 4 weeks = 104.Tokens: 6.2m as burn basis.
104 x 6,20 = ~650m out total - 6,5% of total burnt seems like decent amount not too big but deflationary token narrative.
In reality it should be lower as if marketing will give us more exposure more people will join the pool during that time lowering the APY, if BTC calms down and we eneter basicallly no volume range for few months less unclaimed rewards IMO so I would expect 5% of total supply to be burned.
Range and bull market are adavantegous for claiming. Bear market wont last forever.
Dont mind:
20% burn 30% DAO 50% stakers
15% burn 35% DAO 50% stakers
15% burn 25% DAO 60% stakers
15% burn 30% DAO 55% stakers
No burn scenario - however the minimum of 15% should get burned to win that deflationary token narrative on CT.
In general I dont think we should burn anything if we are not willing to burn 10% of the supply in the long run as this is going to be basically empty burn with no price effect at all. However marketing purpose burn could do the magic trick so I would stick to one of the options to burn only 15% to make token deflationary and when the time comes advertise it on Twitter as main event that will kick in.
… continue those series ‘You spoke we listened!’ - from now on 15% of unclaimed rewards going to the furnace… - and make it as bi-weekly or monthly event with precise amount of coins burned during the event. Weekly amount going to be low but monthly or bi-weekly is gonna look better.
Thats how small burns could serve marketing purposes not harming anybody.
Later on when we have volume more traders and fixed revenue we can implement proper burn model like BNT SUSHI PCS have just made around our total supply.
Why don’t we take a bit of the DAO’s $LINA allocation and pay a professional economist to review the numbers and make a recommendation?
@Captain_Trips_Linear if it wasnt a crypto that would totally make sense and it would be logical step to do however if we take it to professional economist and let him look at the price history and what would it take to get back to for ex 30c or 50c he would have been shocked.
Crypto rarely stick to fair valuation for a long time it goes from one extreme to another in between cycles many projects just die (not implying Lina will die but we can built nice user base to later loose it and struggle for a while), you are longer in crypto than I am so you are prefectly aware. Thats just general thought.
To gain price appreciation in next bull 10% should be burned IMO anything less makes no sense. Think its just more intuitive thing. Burning more might cause concerns why such a big supply in the first place - and voices they made it so big to later burn and pump the price. So burning too much might cause problem too IMO so as burning too little makes little sense unless there is evident purpose to do so.
Hi all, just to add my thoughts. I honestly didn’t think the current system (unclaimed rewards are redistributed to stakers the following week) was a problem or needed addressing.
However after reading some of the discussion, I agree that burning/DAO has potentially more benefits so I support the change. Reducing supply and inflation a little would be welcome
Think it’s still important to reward long term holders and stakers, especially those who increase their Lina/LUSD holdings rather than flip them for quick gains…think Trips said something similar. That said, when I’ve recommended Lina to crypto friends to get new people on board, I get the feeling they need more incentivising to come over. So maybe some sort of new holder bonus would be cool? Might be open to abuse and this is meandearing off topic now
