Should we burn 68% of the total GNO Supply?

Governance
21

10Mill total supply is not bad for a token like GNO.

22

I agree on burn tokens

23

Itā€™s already very good. You can raise the currency price

24

If this proposal will pass, would that imply that from 1.85 tokens incl circulating treasury 700k are locked in lock.gnosis.io and for the first year only 1.15m are circulating? I think for an investment thesis it would be great if the burn would go through, my only concern for voting power would be that also large tokenholders will have ownership increased by x3, which could mean less decentralized.

1 Like
25

this is what I like most in your suggestions:-)

26

That also could be a good thing, a couple larger token holders refusing to distribute creates more scarce, long term interest in that case would be very valueable, while you can make it sure that they donā€™t put weight-votes on things that could hurt their holdings. With time, distribution comes to decentralize anyways, and as I see Gnosis is far away from having centralization issue, including nodes and token holders, compared to other chains-daos.

Burning imo does the job nicely, as it increasing scarce by cutting upcoming inflation, that inflation would be ~70%, and that is honestly something that could hurt value increase, and a shrinking engagement from investors/traders is not something we should seek for.
Imo what we should do, is simply cut that inflation talked above, use it in the right time with a hint of marketing (the action in itself is unique enough, has marketing value) to give it a little push with a couple of paid articles to bring awareness to Gnosis & let the words spread further. Using the Cow airdrop with it would be a perfect match while mentioning the upcoming SAFE airdrop to increase excitement.

The wormhole DAI into GNOSIS chain via Maker is something great looking, but I cannot see why it would stand against the inflation cut as an A or B option
Imo, we can make both to become a reality, and as users & community grows, the liquidity pools will adjust.

5 Likes
27

Time to go to phase 2 for this proposal I think! :slight_smile:

5 Likes
28

I agree with Havenmeester. It seems like we have broad support from the community and would push for this proposal to move to phase 2.

2 Likes
29

After reading through the comments on this topic, I also believe that we should move forward with potential to burn 68% of the GNO supply.

2 Likes
30

Absolutely support GIP-19, to burn at once solved the centralized issue and it massively enhances the investor confidence, we need to do sth aggressive sometimes instead of let project dying slowly.

2 Likes
31

yes,we donā€™t need that much

1 Like
32

We donā€™t need so much, burning can give investors more confidence

33

This is a great idea and I agree to burn. :partying_face:

1 Like
34

After reading GIP-19 carefully, I agree with burn, we donā€™t need so much, burn will greatly increase investor confidence, and we must unite to do something for the project,come on.

35

wen we move to phase 2 ? lets go!

36

Destroying 68% will make GNO healthier and I support it.

1 Like
37

I support it! I think destroying it will make us better!

1 Like
38

Yes, the decision was the right one

1 Like
39

yes,we donā€™t need that much

40

I agree on burn tokens.

1 Like