Please correct me if I’m worry but isn’t this more a promise that the token will be burnt, rather than a protocol requirement that secured by the SNS DAO?
e.g, Someone could offer a service in exchange for any arbitrary token, and promise that they will always burn said token, now and into the future (without deviating). I think this would be the same thing.
The infrastructure that facilitates the burn of the token in exchange for the deploying of the new DAO is still under construction although largely completed.
For the reasons detailed in this post, this infrastructure remains managed by the dev team.
Note: The burn mechanism yields diminishing returns over time and the integrity of the tokenomics does not rely on this burn mechanism being implemented. The burn mechanism is implemented as a means to aid in price stability during the ecosystem’s infancy.
The impact of the burn mechanism converges to zero as The ecosystem matures.
The reason is that tokens are only burned when new DAOs are deployed and when DAOs receive upgrades via the upgrader protocols. Once Personal DAOs have saturated the market, and upgrades become less frequent (due to the protocol becoming more complete), the burn rate converges to zero.
In the event that the burn mechanism is not implemented as promised, the SNS token holders still have the ability to achieve growth in amount of $ICP rewards produced by 1 $DAO token by ensuring the rate of growth of the neuron exceeds the rate of growth of the $DAO token supply. This can be achieved by reducing $DAO token inflation rate and/or increasing the restaking rate of the 8-year neuron.
essentially, as long as the rate of growth of the SNS DAO’s 8-year neuron is greater than the rate of growth of the $DAO token supply, the $ICP rewards produced by 1 $DAO token goes up. The burn mechanism is set in place during the ecosystem’s infancy to allow room for us to be able to have lower restaking rates (and consequently greater rewards rates).
To be clear, in order to maintain the integrity of the $DAO token (now and in the future) relies on no promises from the dev team. The SNS token holders have all the tools at their disposal to secure the token’s integrity. Those tools are:
1 the ability to determine how much of the rewards from the SNS DAO’s 8-year neuron is restaked.
2. the ability to set the inflation rate of the $DAO token.
I’ve written an article detailing the growth strategy for the Personal DAO ecosystem. The article can be found here:
Plan of Action: The Strategy for Bootstrapping the Personal DAO ecosystem
@Lorimer @rem.codes @timk11 i hope you all will commit to applying a similar level of scrutiny to future SNS launches as you all have applied here.
I find it very suspicious that so many ICP indexer SNS launches keep taking place. It’s as if someone is SNS’ing the same project and just changes the UI before doing so.
I suspect one of the previous SNS funded teams may be using the ICP they raised to contribute to their own fraudulent SNS launches to exploit the neuron fund.
Apparently, there’s reason to believe it’s the Yral team
I hope you all commit to maintaining the investigatory posture that you’ve demonstrated here.
Especially you @Lorimer. I worry your questions were disingenuous: an attempt to save face after being exposed for voting prematurely without thoroughly investigating. Prodding in an attempt to retroactively find justification for a vote already submitted.
I’m sure you’ll say you asked questions so intently for the sake of informing the community. I challenge you to prove it by applying the same level of scrutiny to the obvious cash grabs that keep happening under your nose.
It is clear that fake NP and SNS are hotspots for corruption.
(post deleted by author)
I’m probably the most critical / skeptical of all Synapse members when it comes to accepting SNS proposals - I really don’t know why you’re directing this at me. Have your read other SNS threads such as Fuel DAO and Cecil the Lion or ALICE DAO.
No matter what I do, the community usually ends up adopting bad SNSs. Thoses that fail just try again (e.g. Fuel EV).
I receive nothing in return for the hard work I put into inspecting SNS proposals. I can’t be there ready to dig deep on every one (but I try). I invite you and anyone else in the community to do the same.
The concerns regarding neuron fund abuse is not good. I’ll think about rejecting any and all future requests to use the neuron fund.
At the end of the day, there’s no way to stop it from getting abused (it’s what happens during the decentralisation sale, not the syndication phase).
Anyway, I hear you. I’m glad the community is making noise.
Your sns got scrutiny Because people already knew something was up with these recent ones. We just didnt have the proof yet.
Anyways, you got the community support! Im now an pesonalDAO holder, Good luck!
The main reason I looked into personal DAO was because the announcement was done a long time before the actual SNS so I eventually decided to check it out and noticed some points which led to the questions I asked.
But my stance has not changed, I still think Personal DAO is not the right fit for SNS.