See the Capped & Stepped General Info forum post here.
Explore the Hard Pressure model here.
Explore the Medium Pressure model here.
Explore the Soft Pressure model here.
This exercise allows us to gather data on DOT holder preferences.
It does not, however, predict the outcome of a vote in OpenGov!
Only hard pressure would work.
We all, and especially big DOT holders, need to work out other strategies, not just focusing on inflation, but also on improving the following:
Interaction with exchanges and infrastructure (to lobby to add hydration and other successful networks to exchanges, direct withdrawals to different parachains, DeFi infrastructure, DOT visibility and promotion, on exchanges in return for validation rewards).
Reducing the number of multi-account validators (10–30 validators from one entity or individual is nonsense).
We also need to engage key industry players and financial institutions (sell DOT to the right people to form ETFs and companies with DOT/Web3 treasuries, let them have skin in the game ).
DOT distribution is still poor; we need more highly motivated entities involved!
Taken together, these measures could produce positive results.
Meaningful work on increasing buying power/pressure needed. We cannot ignore this and focus only on creating technology. Someone also needs to sell this tech.
Can we do medium first and see how it goes for a few months?
And do hard pressure if we see it's not enough.
Hard pressure definitely, but stepping down a % of the remaining supply as suggested by the author.
maybe try first with soft or medium before the hard one? o_O
HIC is voting for Medium or Hard Pressure, as the two most sensible options. Inflation has been too high for too long, especially when compared to competing ecosystems. HIC is a long term holder of DOT and we believe this inflation reduction exercise could be one of the most important initiatives to support the price of DOT in the long term. Also, we are glad to see that Jay is throwing his political weight behind this.
Frens, I agree about capping the supply, but what will happen if we start cutting network reward life support before we have a viable revenue model? Validators will fully jump ship, DOT dumps, and everyone loses. Just because Bitcoin halves every 2 years does NOT mean DOT needs to. Unless everyone here is willing to fully fund and build new revenue models and projects built on Polkadot we should at least give enough runway to make a plan.
Please vote with reason, not with feelings. Cutting the rewards does not guarantee price go up. Polkadot is more than just the market cap. At the least, a medium runway can be hard coded into the protocol and be a commitment.
Tengo una pregunta ¿La reducción de recompensa afectará también a los validadores? Me gustaría que los protegiéramos ya que son pieza clave importante para el funcionamiento de la red. Debe seguir siendo viable para ellos y mantener activas las pools de recompensas, ya que el staking ayuda mucho a la funcionalidad y seguridad de la red. Me gusta la idea de reducir el suministro total y reducir la inflación. Propongo que el APR baje hasta tener un mínimo de 3.5% o 3% anual esto para incentivar a la comunidad de hacer Staking y Hodl al token de DOT, esto ayudaría a controlar las ventas masivas y desesperadas de la gente que se atoró desde 2021. Y ayudaría a tener mas fuerte el precio del activo conduciendo a una tendencia alcista saludable, mantener el protocolo, la funcionalidad, la seguridad de la red y ser un activo más atractivo para clientes potenciales.
