We mods aim to have thick skin. if you had said this to any other user, i think this flirts dangerously close with ad hominem.
That being said… i disagree with many people in this forum who behave well. None of them have their comments hidden. Please take note.
We need sound economic analysis and simulations by some real trained economists than some out of blue thoughts by self righteous opinionated engineers who think they are almighty.
Also the real problem is how to make ICP deflationary by burning more. 8 years or 5 years do not matter much. Think of a mechanism to burn more.
I genuinely wish you would read much closer what I wrote.
I never wrote your comment said “screw over dfinity”
I did write that the independent phrases “screw over” and "dfinity sounds like a drug addict” in both comments, are not the tone we want for the forum. If the flagegd comment had said “Alice sounds like a drug addict”, maybe the bad nature of the comment is more obvious. These are phrases from the two comments flagged.
If you find my writing of the message confusing because I messaged two users at the same time about two comments, I think that is fair. I will not group two users in the same comment again.
if you read my comment quickly and realize your mistake, that is ok. I cannot cast stones myself for I have certainly misread many things and gotten upset before reading closer.
According to your proposal, Reducing neuron dissolve delays would affect the voting rewards function？
This one was done by Dfinity last year and is showing that it will be deflationary in about 5 years from now.
You can search and find the entire thread.
Are discussions on other platforms forbidden? Make a post on X, let the discussion happen, go through all the comments, and filter out the ‘fucks,’ ‘retards,’ ‘drug addicts,’ and other ad hominem attacks. Draw conclusions and create a proper post with sound arguments here, and no one will delete it.
@diegop I do not want to waste both of our time arguing here. So i’m going to agree with you. Lets agree to disagree.
Anyone can share the forum with anyone. In fact, that’s very common.
It’s also common in this forum (more people to post ideas to get feedback and iterate, then increase how loudly they share as things become progressively baked.
If it were a real NNS proposal. The ones people vote on, those are typically more baked and more loudly shared
Because the AI post was an actual demonstration, possible tokenomic changes are gathering feedback before an actual proposal is crafted.
Even the name of the topic starts with ‘POSSIBLE,’ with the whole purpose of gathering community feedback. Can we return to the actual topic and not derail it with off-topic comments?
This is your opinion and I am not obliged to share the same or agree with it. Beside I was addressing @dominicwilliams about the share. You are not Dominic. Unless you speak for him thats a different topic.
Why didn’t you share this topic on Twitter @dominicwilliams Don’t you want your investors to know about the major changes being discussed?
It’s evident that the 8-year gang are a group of very faithful believers. I don’t understand why the ecosystem and Dfinity aren’t engaging in more marketing and airdrops centered around the 8-year holders, creating more valuable NFTs or memes, and rewarding core users. If you don’t make loyal users rich, how can you attract users from other blockchain projects? Dfinity and all SNS projects have disappointed the enthusiasm of the 8-year holders.
High inflation but almost no ecosystem burning is one of the fatal problems of the ICP token economic model.
The rules of @dominicwilliams are too complicated and seem unfair to the 8-year-gang.
Let’s simplify a complex problem.
Reduce all parameters by 50%.
That is, stake term, maturity, etc.
The minimum stake term should also be reduced from 6 months to 3 months.
The final inflation rate also shrank from 5% to 2.5%.
One more word:
Market value management is particularly important.
The same as stock market.
Suggestions on controlling inflation: Is it possible to anchor the amount of rewards to be burned, the total number of rewards is equal to the amount burned, the more prosperous the ecosystem, the more the number of burns, the more the total number of rewards. Then, according to the number of nodes, staking weight, etc., the total number of rewards will be paid first, and the remaining will be dynamically paid according to the number of years, quantity, etc.
@viva if only this change occurs (burning = rewards), those with long dissolve delays would not be able to take advantage of the sudden price pump. So,your ideas should come with unlocking everyone at the same time which would create a price dump we may not be able to recover
I’m genuinely thrilled and amazed by the power of decentralization within the ICP community, particularly through the insights provided by SNN holders. Witnessing how individuals collectively shape the ecosystem is truly inspiring. Here, the community determines what’s best, showcasing the remarkable potential of decentralized decision-making. It’s truly amazing
I started my 8 year, non-dissolving, neuron in August 2021 and added to it bigtime since. I obviously did it because, I believe in the project but, also for the staking rewards. Maybe we should consider giving a choice to those who already have an 8 year nueron if they want to reduce or not and, if not, keeping those rewards as they have been and, going forward only offer max 5 years.
Hello.
I have read the various opinions.
Basically, I am in favor if all stakers are fairly shortened in term and reduced in compensation.
However, I think this is a last resort and an admission that Dfinity has failed to design token economics.
We must also be prepared to be accused by other communities of being centralized and having failed to design it.
There is no excuse.
Has Dfinity considered permanently locking some of the tokens held by the foundation and not receiving compensation for them?
First of all, they are responsible for their own creation and design.
Do you not perform self-sacrifice?
I feel as though this is extremely important to the topic, yet isn’t being considered - this analysis is what ICPs tokenomics are modeled after.
Security needs to be audited by external auditing companies. The same for tokenomics. Still my question is that is there even a real economist at dfinity?
