Should we burn 68% of the total GNO Supply?

Governance
41

Agree.
For GNO, even if 68% is burned, the remaining would be enough to support DAO’s potential spend in the future.
Not to mention that the DAO treasury has such a large amount of other tokens in it.

42

支持 :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3: :wave:t3:

1 Like
43

I would support this proposal.

1 Like
44

yes,i agreen.i think this is must be.

2 Likes
45

As the community support is clearly majority, it would been ideal to move to the next phase to vote, so a long awatited decision could come to realization and the burning of the 68% of the total GNO supply could happen!:slight_smile: @ernst What do you think? :innocent:

1 Like
46

I agree on burn tokens

1 Like
47

I am new to Gnosis ecosystem and the GNO distribution was always a concern for me.

This will also incentivize people to lock the GNO on the newly opened 1 year contract ; now they can lock tokens without concerns about GNO dump.

So I support this proposal .
It’s the simplest way and probably most affective way to do it .
on the other hand , It is like to burning money . So it could be more complex ways but less affective in short term.

2 Likes
48

Fully agree to destroy

2 Likes
49

have no reason to not do, this should be solved years ago, burn it!

1 Like
50

with the 68% burn, we will have

  1. less supply, better price
  2. decentralized token distribution
  3. better investors confidence, marketing exposure
1 Like
51

I think there are many ways to think about increasing investor diversity, beyond just burning supply.

I agree that we should proceed to phase 2, however we should not go ahead with a burn without considering other options.

52

when phase 2 ? please

53

Can’t anyone post the GIP?