why rush the burning/locking up by Dec 20? Why not let the project grow for a few months and then vote again on burning/locking up?
FOR both the adjustments
All is correct. Mate all the numbers are in the proposal (yet ot be finalised though)
- PI LM - 1st month - 1 mn, 2ns month - 700k, after that - 400k per month
- CVP/ETH LM - 91k per week
Well, just not to constantly change the tokenomics: we can include all the key adjustments into one proposal IMO
Hey everyone, after discussing with the team we added two more minor modifications to the proposal.
I like this modifications, because:
- Users will not dump CVP from rewards into market if index`s cap is low and this will prevent CVP price dump which may lead to index cap dump (cvp is a part of index but you all know it));
- Pipt LM program was far ahead of CVP lm program, now they are pretty much close to each other;
For TL/DRers: we need to attract as much liquid in index as we can. And make it fast.
That`s all about)
1 Like
Great modification. Smart move! Definitely support. When it goes to real voting?
FOR IT!
@YanDelphi how about adding a paragraph re burning of up to 50% of CVP in the final version of the proposal?
We can come up with exact nu,ber of the tokens to be burnt after the mainnet launch
probably, the token burn has to be a separate proposal. Let’s see how the index will perform and after that, we can burn tokens (as it is an option to support price expectations). It is like a secret CVP weapon:)
Is there a bug in the UI? It looks like a titled Proposal 9 is currently active in the governance queue. What’s up with this?
It was a bug with our backend after system upgrade. Now it is fixed