New-account limits on this forum currently permit one embedded media item and two links. To preserve the complete proposal, charts, evidence, and references without removing important material, the full discussion draft has been published on Commonwealth:
For which Target should that be - Oracle Pool, or…what is the Point that we want Put down again our Volumen, if we have some.
But why I am not wondering , the Burn Tax a yearly reminder.
And on Commonwealth- I start reading - but serious what in the h… you did.
To much text and for an Proposal I would like to see max and DIN A4 format what not grab my time for the Burn Tax - i know now how it ends ![]()
-
we’ve had 4 years to replace the burn tax, we have not come up with any better solutions. there is almost 0 utility to speak of.
-
since the supply is still enormous, we should accept that we are still in the “burn” narrative instead of “utility” narrative - focus on burns should be prioritized (we may add quick-unstaking fees, deletion of old/inactive supply, manually burning the TFL wallets that have remained etc.)
-
the transfers that have been executed on-chain most likely would’ve been made anyways, regardless of the tax rate
-
higher burn tax might incentivize CEXes to ask for a whitelist in exchange for some benefit to Terra blockchain (i.e. off-chain burns etc.)
-
if we remove the tax/lower it further, that might induce Binance to end their burn program. Increasing the tax will have no negative impact on Binance.
-
even if this prop would fail, it would be good to gauge community’s (validator) sentiment. Since no validator actively discusses these proposals, I would even like to reduce the deposit from 5 to 1 million. Why pay 5 million to get slapped in the face with a VETO from a validator who never bothered to discuss the proposal publicly.
-
if you’re serious about this proposal, it should be a parameter change proposal not a text proposal
you can use AI to summarize any larger texts for you
Ok I can - but it was this time an real interest behind to read them.
But yes I do it ![]()