Possible Optimizations of NNS Tokenomics (Updated!)

Reward reduction is currently the wrong measure. Maybe in a few years but currently the unlocks are the real issue. If you want to regulate that, you should instead propose to slow down VC unlocks. That would really help stabilize the price. But reducing rewards for a 2.6% reduction of sell pressure is pointless in the current situation and only punishes long term holders.

That’s all what I had to say.

Cap all the lockers that got ICP pre official release. That sounds like the fairest way to go, how many millions ICP would this affect? Everyone who bought after May 10. 2021 should be able to keep 8 years stake. Future ICP staked from a set date, also max 5 years.

2 Likes

prolonging the agony is even worse
getting rid of all vc or seed investors asap for me is a better option

this month the last unlock was around 3 millions
tokens that was the last big unlock
we have around one year left of unlockings
if you check the amount that is going to be realease each month for the next year
the total amount is also around 3 millions
the unlocks are slowing down in amount
is better to finally get rid of the unlocks so we can finally move on
but you want to postpone them or slow them down

i don’t see any benefit
that will make things even worse
because the 1st thing people will do after their tokens unlock if the price is high
they will sell
but if their tokens unlocks and the price is low or not high enough, they might still hold, restacke or sell just a low portion of their bag

i really hope we can agree on something one day :grin::joy::sob:

because in this topic we are going in opposite direction, is perfectly fine anyway
i also fun to have exchange diferent point of views, nothing personal
:+1:t2:

1 Like

really think about it
if vc or seed investors are the problem
then getting rid of them asap is the best option

if dfinity slow down or put a hold on unlocks
then it will take longer to get rid of them
the 1st thing they will do after their tokens unlock if the price is high is sell or dump all their tokens driving the price down massively
after we were already up
is better to get rid of them now
while we are still low
since they bought at 0.03
they might sell a big amount of their bag or at least a reasonable amount

then we go back to square one
the never ending story if they keep restacking their tokens, since they have so many tokens
they can easily create a lot more via rewards
they are chocking us to death
we will never move up untill we get rid of them
by slowing down or reducing the rewards that will create less tokens
that os good for a 1st step in the right direction
but a few nore steps has to be taken after that
but things will get a lot worse if we simply don’t do anything

also by reducing the amount of icp that people will get via rewards that will stop people from stacking for such a long periods of time
because the amount they will get is no longer really worth waiting all that time, i think that will help to control supply from increasing

They obvs can’t answer that because of the way the SEC automagically considers something a security if the founders are caught guaranteeing or intimating that something should be X price.

You can see the price action of ICP IOUs up to the launch date here.

Isn’t inflation a problem? While LUNA coin was at $130 and a supply of 150,000,000 tokens, luna coin dropped to $0.00000001 with the release of 4.5 trillion tokens in one day. This event was a very good experiment that showed what inflation is.

1 Like

That’s not comparable. Luna had an extreme hyper inflation. That was really just money printing.

2 Likes

image
Yeah i dont think that website is very truthful

1 Like

The things that look wrong to you are easily figured out if you consider it’s effectively a dead page that was replaced by the new one when the token launched:

The 99% figure includes an ATH wick from the last day on FTX and start on Binance (which still seems to be smoothed-down, but most sites smooth wicks out completely)
This old page only displayed data from MEXC and FTX at the time and stopped being updated once FTX jumped out the window - MEXC isn’t considered a trusted website.

New metrics without the pre-launch screwarounds for anybody who bothered to look display as:

A company paying a 6.36% dividend can’t be trusted, and thats ICP right now.
8 year guys need to understand that if inflation won’t go down the first that are harmed are them.
ICP will go to zero unless inflation goes down at least a 50%.

1 Like

A simple thing we can do is set the inflation to trend to zero after 8 years, instead of stopping at 5%. That would respect current contracts and set a path towards deflation. We can always increase the rewards later on if needed.

Didn’t Dfinity put a deflationary measure into the reward system already? Dropping down to 5% over X amount of years? Like they thought about this already. Didn’t they also already make a tokenomics change since launch? What happens when we accept this reduction and then in 6 months we have another “Hey guys we need to cut your rewards again” proposal? Anyone who was on Taggr within the last few months has an idea of how this could go. Rewards were changed multiple times and a lot of people lost faith and sold because it wasn’t what was agreed upon when they signed up. Maybe we need to follow suite and lose 60% of our users in order to be sustainable long term but it’ll be another black eye on the chart when we drop to new ATL. Future adoption will be almost non-existent at that point.

BTC’s inflation rate was higher until 2016 and was double that again for its first 4 years, still seems to have done well fairly well for itself.

I’d argue adoption is our main problem, I’m sure Dfinity are as stunned as I am that the wider ETH dev community aren’t all over it because a good few were hyped about the possibilities 7-8 years ago but in the meantime their community grew by an order of magnitude at minimum so the amount who knew what Dfinity was by the time launch rolled around was easily less than 10% of the wider dev community, it was just another random new project appearing before their eyes so now the 90%+ have to be spoonfed (against their will, they make it a struggle) the history and purpose pre-2021.

The exact supply limit of BTC has been determined. This information alone is enough to push the price of BTC up. There is no supply limit on platforms such as ICP. Everyone’s expectation is that applications will be created on the platform, the platform will finance itself by making money from it, and the rest of the earnings will be given to token holders as a reward.
Since there is no gain;
1- Tokens are printed to finance the platform
2- In order to save token prices in the market from downward pressure, they distribute rewards to token holders in return for staking.
In other words, there is a mechanism that creates inflation.
1-The most permanent way to turn this mechanism into a definitive one is for the platform to make money.
2-Otherwise, all token holders, node holders and definity foundation must continue on their way with a common sacrifice and minimum inflation tokenomics.
3- One must somehow find new investors to deposit money into the Definity ICP token and the ICP platform. In this scenario, the arrival of new investors will reduce the need to mint tokens, as the commission fees arising from ICP wallet transfers will increase with the increase in transaction volume on the ICP platform.

1 Like

BTC ≠ ICP

BTC = Crytocurrency
Fix supply no burning mechanism

ICP = Utility Token
Minting and Burning Mechanism

Moderator note:

@8yrneuron community flagged your comment that had “ DFINITY and their paid affiliates and their ignorant community” and I approved with the flags so I removed the post.

Please be aware this is your last warning. Any more comments like this and I will suspend your account.

And to be clear, calling anyone ignorant, specially a whole community is clear ad hominem.

3 Likes

while i understand that dfinity did mentioned and specified that the % in rewards was propense to be change, alter or modify based on a few factors, i also understand that dfinity can’t simply try to fix something just by only cutting down on rewards

at some point dfinity also has to look at another alternatives and try to find a way to fix things without doing the same process over and over again, because people are going to feel like they are being target and they are the ones paying for everything

soon dfinity will have to take a look at the fee or burning mechanism, i do understand that they want to keep the price down but they can increase the fee just a little and still keep the price down to be competitive

they can’t take everything just from one side or sector, fees are ridicously small a little bump won’t hurt, we need to burn cycles and keep supply down in order for the price to go up

1 Like

As I mentioned in my article above, sacrifices should not be expected only from stakers. If sacrifices are required to reduce inflation, all parties must sacrifice equally

1 Like

i totally agree with you sir
100%

if we are willing to sacrifice for the greater good
then is fair for dfinity to also do the same

i do agree with the proposal to cut down a little bit on rewards because i think too many tokens are bein created

i guess is fair to expect dfinity to increase a little bit the fees in order to increase or speed up the burning mechanism

dfinity to be fair and i think many people has already mentioned this as a possibility or alternative to help fight or reduce inflation

All well and good. Still let seed investors get a max 5 year neuro lock. + future locks. Atleast start with seed investors. Getting ICP at 0.03$ and forever gaining massively from neuron stake is kinda heartbreaking for retail.

2 Likes