The burning is actually a great idea as it will indeed make $VOLT more deflationary.
But how about we do this instead?
We can introduce a Vesting Mechanism: Consider implementing a vesting mechanism for the tokens distributed to stakers. Instead of distributing all the tokens immediately, a portion could be vested over time, incentivizing stakers to remain engaged with the protocol for an extended period. This approach helps maintain a long-term commitment from stakers and reduces the risk of a massive selloff, dump or sell pressure once staked tokens have completed their terms.
I think the idea of reducing the token supply and allocating the remaining tokens to community initiatives is a positive move for the long-term sustainability of the Voltage Finance launchpad on the DEX.
I would like to suggest that we consider the potential impact of the burning proposal on the existing holders of the VF launchpad tokens. While reducing the supply may increase the value of the remaining tokens, it may also result in a negative impact on the market dynamics and liquidity of the Voltage Finance launchpad. It would be helpful to have more information on how the burning proposal will be implemented and what measures will be taken to mitigate any potential negative impacts on existing token holders.
For the long-term viability of the Voltage Finance launchpad on the DEX, I believe the concept of reducing the token supply and distributing the remaining tokens to community projects is a good one.
I would like to suggest that we take into account how the burning proposal would affect the current owners of VF launchpad tokens. While reducing the supply might increase the value of the tokens still in circulation, it might also have a detrimental effect on the Voltage Finance launchpadās market dynamics and liquidity. More details on the burning proposalās implementation and the steps being taken to minimize any possible negative effects on token holders who have already purchased tokens would be helpful.
Overall, as a whole I agree. I disagree when one says burning volt can affect the liquidity. It is true if the $VOLT burned is in the current LPās, but if it is reserves being burned then it is all the better and will indeed make it more scarce, but it wonāt harm the liquidity.
I believe this is a you have a good idea of the allocation of places to burn it. One could alternatively suggest that since some of the $VOLT funds are being burned that went toward potentially further funding/running the project, perhaps some of fuses $10m ignite funding program could be used to go toward some of this. Just an idea.
A gradual burn over 10 weeks sounds very good. I would make this process as transparent as possible to the community. I would recommend this to be released and start when the market conditions are most optimal, for a good response from the crypto community. Thanks again Tomas, and I appreciate anyone who considers my thoughts here.
The most effective way to burn tokens is by permanently removing them from circulation, reducing the total supply. Which is happening in the proposal, however, the most important thing is that the token burning is being conducted transparently, and for me I think its easier to make the right choice based on feedback. Thanks.
When is the burn going to be implemented. Would be good to get this done before the next bull run to maximise itās potential to develop value in Volt token.
In addition to my comment above before, there is still the need to ensure that security and stability stay prime on the network, It has been quite stable so far. Thank you
The issue is how to develop long term token value. Thereās plenty of volt in circulation and team wallets to provide LP or do whatever utility they want with it - itās just very low value.
Burning excess tokens will aid long term price growth. Reducing FDV vs TVL encourages new investors and positions the project positively - not many projects have TVL greater than FDV.
Fuse does, but Voltage is $1.4mFDV vs $1m TVL. We need to work to get FDV lower and TVL higher. A token burn helps that.
All these changes will see their impact in the next bull. Weāre building for the future, not for results now.
First and foremost, we want to emphasize that we are unequivocally committed to burning the tokens in the near future. This decision is not up for debate; the tokens will be burnt, 100% guaranteed. Moreover, based on ongoing evaluations, thereās a possibility that we might burn even more tokens than initially proposed.
Thank you for your detailed feedback and insights on this matter. We fully understand the concerns and see the immense benefits of the proposed token burn. Our unwavering objective is to bolster the long-term value growth for VOLT token holders. The decision to reduce the token supply through a burn mechanism is a strategic move in line with this goal.
Itās crucial to note that the token burn is a component of a more comprehensive strategy. Concurrently, weāre channeling efforts into locking more VOLT with veVOLT and amplifying the tokenās utility with the upcoming Launchpad. These synergistic actions are designed to fortify the ecosystem, ensuring the VOLT tokenās prominence and value.
While we recognize that the current market conditions might temper the immediate effects of the burn, our sights are set on the long-term horizon. Weāre strategically positioning ourselves for sustained success in future market cycles.
However, we also understand the importance of community consensus. If the majority of the community feels that the burn should be executed immediately, we are open to that direction. Itās up to you. Please share your thoughts and let us know if youād prefer to expedite the process.
We remain dedicated to enhancing the VOLT tokenās utility and are actively considering various supply reduction strategies. Your insights are invaluable to us, and we deeply appreciate the active engagement of each community member.
