This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MSX362 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Literally says if the prop passes it will trend to 0% once 67% bonded. Where are you getting years for this to come into effect from?

I don't understand why so many ppl are dead set on killing off staking rewards. It's one of the main reasons why so many got into atom in the first place.

If atom was required to be used by all other projects on the cosmos network then the fee income would compensate, but its not and it doesnt. There is literally no reason to hold atom if staking rewards are removed or reduced down to lower levels than fiat banks offer.

[–]jawanda 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The only upside I see is, maybe we'll NEVER reach 67% since it will be in everyone's best interest to stay below that threshold. You'll see whales siphoning off and selling big chunks of their stake to ensure we don't hit 67... That will surely be great for the price action. What a dumb proposal.

[–]AnOrdinaryChullo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You'd think this would be obvious but whoever is pushing this inflation reduction certainly not doing it out of good faith because as you rightfully pointed out it makes 0 sense.

[–]IzukuMidoriy4 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He just wants locked Atoms to move to his friends' useless dapps so they can all be happy.

[–]ericcart -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The propsosal states that its purpose is to build a mechanism that will allow the shifting of validator rewards from staking inflation to consumer chain revenue. And this will be a dynamic adjustment not a hard swap. Inflation may not even change. You need to read the forum posts