RE: Impromptu Community Vote - Unclaimed Blurt Burn
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Impromptu Community Vote - Unclaimed Blurt Burn
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
I am in favor of this option because I do not see any difference between user and exchange in this case. Anyone who has not shown interest in the platform until now (more than a year) has forfeited his right for the airdrop distributed at that time. Of course, there is then again complaining on the other platforms, but there would already be if it would only affect the exchanges, because one thing should be clear, complaining is always.
Yes true "complaining is always" I agree :)
it's 100% right decision, everyone should vote for this. very soon we will see, we are on the moon. WE ARE BLURT.
Sometimes it is fun to think about those rags to riches stories of people who discover stocks after a lengthy time and make good on shares their grandparents purchased. I don’t think that is the point of crypto (or society) in general though. To me we are building something new that can hopefully help many people. It is the daily interactions and transactions that are making the most value for the system imho. I don’t think of it exactly like a business but our group efforts are building something for everyone. As such I don’t think these efforts should benefit so much those parties who are not directly involved any longer.
I think having large inactive exchange accounts is a liability on a new Cosmos system which could be focused more on decentralized trading. Having inactive user accounts also prevents the system from being used as well as it could be for distributing funds to active users. I don’t think we have really seen how well these types of systems could work because all the present versions of Graphene based chains seem to suffer from some degree of this. (Inactive accounts and ninja mined stake, come to mind.)
I think it is a good move to burn both unclaimed exchange and user stake although it might not be popular with some people. This is a new situation and does not fit so well with the old ways of thinking. (It seems sort of like a move from a corporation type structure that pays mostly inactive shareholders to a user owned business type structure that pays mostly active employees.)
I’m confused by this statement:
Are you intending to burn tokens from inactive user accounts on Blurt and remint those burned tokens on Cosmos? Under who’s control would these remint tokens go? Wouldn’t that debase that chain and cause a similar issue to what we are experiencing in Blurt now?
I would tend to think that leaving Blurt operating exactly as is now but only giving active user accounts new tokens on Cosmos could also work. Perhaps an option to burn tokens on Blurt by sending them to @null and getting new tokens issued on Cosmos could also be setup.
Whatever is done should be made clear enough so that everyone knows where, when and how funds are being altered.
Yes correct whatever is going to be burned on Blurt will be sent to null or simply wiped to zero, devs will advise how that will work in practice in the HF.
Those funds that were nulled will then be reissued on Cosmos as liquidity pool incentives, airdrop to users that attested their Cosmos account (see my previous posts) and to the validators of the Cosmos chain as a startup stake which will be required to launch the chain.
Cosmos Blurt will exist in parallell to Graphene Blurt, but for a while will not have a rewards pool, it will be for the purposes of Dex liquidity, think of it as a Cosmos wrapped Blurt equivalant, but on Cosmos there are no tokens only interconnected chains, so it will be a native Cosmos chain.
Thank you for the reply that makes things a lot clearer for me.
I'm actually warming up to this one, my vote was initially for option 1 but after some thought, it feels like a fresh reboot of the Blurt blockchain, improves the reward pool output, keeps total supply down as we mint new Blurt on other platforms and also gives the flexibility to increase overall inflation to be greater than 9.5% if needed since the total supply is reduced.
But lets say there is 1 percent as a Streamer i call it Lurker, its a User which have his own POWER and watch all night long my stream without saying anything or doin anything ... but he / she watches all night the stream , but now i get a step forward and bann all INACTIVE Accounts because i call em bots would it be fair for this LURKER then ???
No thats why i think its okay to touch the never touched STAKE instead of deleting accounts because if someone didnt used it so far doesnt mean they maybe dropped it there as a PLAN "B" Investment or watching time by time what happens to the chaain without being ACTIVE in a way of using votes or doin their own posts.....
It would no be fair to delete their money( TOKEN ) and as you say it could really start a BULLSHIT WAVE to Blurt which it not deserve!
I never got an AIRDROP Payout of Blurt i was a late Starter , i like the idea of reburning this airdrops which never been used ... Thats why i went with OPTION 1
I think this option is the best as it will decrease the total supply and also increase the reward pool as well. So will there be a 30 day notice for the users as well before burning their coins?
Yes correct, 30 day notice will be made public and memo's sent on Hive, Blurt and Steem.
Please I don't really understand this, hope this won't affect the newbies. I haven't fully understand this blurt.
I try to read and grab something but I'm seeing different opinions..
I'm completely lost 😭
No worries, newbies will not be affected, they will actually benefit from increased rewards when a lot of liquid tokens are taken out of circulation and burned; the rewards pool will then respond positively.
I am fully in support of this position. Come to think of it, many users here are contributing vastly to the blurt community through different activities but 1/5th of total blurt supply is just lying dormant on exchanges. This is not making any sense to me at all.
As for dormant accounts, there is every chance that these users are no longer into blurt and may have even lost their accounts and moved on. So it is logically correct to burn this coins although there is a little risk of burning accounts of HODL investors
But please how exactly can I vote? @megadrive
Just vote for the comment that this was a reply to.
Vote the very top comment starting with Vote for option 2
For me, this is the best option and the one I would support 1000%.
This is the most coherent option, it is necessary to make adjustments and, above all, to make decisions that can drive a better growth not only of the price but also of the platform.
I have voted the vote option 2. To me, it is better option.
100%
I vote for option 2
Burn it all ….
Pyromaniac lol :)
VOTE FOR OPTION 2
The option two is my choice.
I vote for this option (2).
I express my opinion from @jacobgadikian post, unclaimed exchange and user stake must burn.
This is the best approach to support the future of blurt.
I also think option 2 is the best choice.
Vote for option 2
I'll go for this option because you ain't making any use of Blurt why you're having it. A bit risky but 'no risk no gain'.
I vote for this option 2.