Unclaimed means that the account with the air dropped tokens has never been logged into. When yoz reduce the amount of coins from let us say 400 million to 300 million by burning, you have a price increase in that case of 25% just through the burn...
RE: What do you guys think about burning those unclaimed Airdrop Blurts???
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
What do you guys think about burning those unclaimed Airdrop Blurts???
Hmmmm. To me, that would be theft, as those tokens belong to the owners even if they haven't been using them.
Deleting tokens from private wallets also sends a message to users (and potential users) of this blockchain: "Your funds can be deleted or taken if the owners want." Just knowing it's possible, which you and I now do, is not a good thing. If we actually went through with it, there would be no denying it can be done. Such a message would drive people away, permanently, which could only have a downward effect on the token price.
"..reduce the amount of coins.. you have a price increase"
The tokens that would be deleted are not in circulation. By very definition, they are not being used, and expected to NEVER be used. That means they are not available on the market, and not impacting prices. I don't believe deleting tokens that will never be used can have any effect on the price.
Perhaps deleting tokens that ARE in use, like on exchanges, being used in trades, or sitting liquid in a whale's account, would have an effect on the price. This assumption is the basis of the push to send HIVE tokens to the "null" account to be deleted. There have been numerous campaigns and requests and incentives to get users to delete their own funds, promising them an increase in the value of their remaining tokens. I have yet to see this really pan out. Doing that with tokens that aren't even part of the ecosystem and not on the market in any way is certainly not going to have any positive effect.
So unless I'm missing something here, it's a "no" from me. No offense intended! It can't hurt to discuss.
I notice the biggest accounts on this blockchain (socialgraph, initblurt, megadrive, etc) contain a lot of BLURT tokens that were not earned through content-creation. Perhaps some of the tokens in those accounts should be deleted, under the assumption that deleting tokens increases the price and helps the blockchain.
100%
This has been explained before to him, and others, that since the tokens aren't in circulation, they intrinsically don't make the price increase. One has to wonder why people suggest such idiotic things which by a cursory consideration would obviously be deemed retarded, do they really not think about the things they say?
How do you know that? Who says they don't make a price increase?
Logic, Common Sense, invariably you!
If the coins aren't claimed then they aren't on the market therefore they cannot make the price increase, if you start fucking with people's money I can see them coming out of the woodwork to dump it all, as was mentioned above if you would have stopped for a moment to think about it. In a debate you make a claim, such as 'burning the tokens increases the price' and you proceed to list the reasons and the method that substantiated your claim, if you don't your opponent will simply denounce it as nonsense, without reason or way to be sound or substantiated, try it before you open your mouth and make declarations that make you look retarded because you couldn't have considered what you're suggesting, like a moron.
This was meant for outofthematrix.
He's correct. The market typically has a couple of hundred dollars volume daily, the majority of Blurt for sale sitting there as most buying have purchase orders waiting to exploit the low demand and desperate hands.
If there were a velocity of millions daily such as Hive has, it could be arguable. The fact that there is many days a demand of a few hundred dollars or less means those tokens sitting unused in accounts have zero bearing on the value of Blurt.
Possibly in the future of Blurt, but there is nothing so far to indicate it is heading that way as of right now.
I was assuming, that those tokens also show up in the overall token number...?
So what if you assume that? Do you not recognize the obvious implication that if the coins aren't on the market or traded they don't, and cannot effect price?
Ok, then so be it... And a psychological effect by reduction of supply?
You mean people will dump their stake because it might get 'burned' otherwise? Intended vs unintended effects.
yep
He's correct. The market typically has a couple of hundred dollars volume daily, the majority of Blurt for sale sitting there as most buying have purchase orders waiting to exploit the low demand and desperate hands.
If there were a velocity of millions daily such as Hive has, it could be arguable. The fact that there is many days a demand of a few hundred dollars or less means those tokens sitting unused in accounts have zero bearing on the value of Blurt.
Possibly in the future of Blurt, but there is nothing so far to indicate it is heading that way as of right now.
Ok, I still don't quite understand it, but thank you very much for the insight!
the market price of blurt is purely a function of how many tokens are currently for sale and how many buyers want those tokens
the "grand total of all tokens in existence" is not part of that market value calculation
Ok, I have understood that in the meantime... Thanks! 🙏😉
The emotional dork you are engaging with has you (as well as many of us) on mute. Even if he didn't have you muted, logic escapes him as I've exposed for some time.
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@practicalthought/rlu7z1
exactly
BINGO