30% Supply reduction : Pro's and Con's

Jupiter DAO $JUP
41

I feel it’s hard to have a meaningful discussion without knowing the exact details of the proposal.

The current plan to drop the proposal on Wednesday, open voting on Thursday, while discussing Friday and Saturday doesn’t make sense to me. There will be a lot of votes cast even before the discussion begins simply because people will not want to miss voting given the penalty for doing so. Unfortunately, this short turnaround from proposal to voting seems to be becoming standard practice here.

I also think that if you post the proposal sooner, that gives the Uplink WG time to run a bounty for short-form videos bringing awareness to the proposal prior to the vote going live. As scheduled, there is no time to do this and that is an opportunity missed.

10 Likes
42

Ask yourself this, are you voting for greed? If so, vote the opposite of your decision :vulcan_salute:

3 Likes
43

I get there are reasons people will want to vote against this. But looking at the supply reduction plan logically, the way it will be implemented, and the positive impact it will have for all long term, I struggle to grasp any persuasive arguments why this 30% reduction in token supply wouldn’t be overwhelmingly good for all and the Jup ecosystem🤞🏿

7 Likes
44

While in this current instance (and that is me assuming that the proposal does not stray from what is assumed here) I think it is gonna be fine, I agree in more general terms that this should be handled different in the future.

The topic that @lochie2001 made here, should ideally be a similar format divided into two parts as the lead-topic.

  1. The actual proposal
  2. The explanation with the Pro’s and Con’s

From release of a proposal to opening votes, ideally there should be a week of time for discussions. The time short before the vote you have the highest attention of the community and their anticipation, better to use that opportunity used to clarify all there is needed and then have the people settle in advance so they can rush then the votes after all is settled.

5 Likes
45

I mean there are some arguments presented, but it is really overwhelming to even consider everything and I really rather short my circuit to default to the long term positive impact of voting yes.

4 Likes
46

Well written and thought out!

3 Likes
47

The last time I held bonk and they did a burn, I did make money tho. Same with Shiba inu. Yes different blockchain but I was still using coinbase back then and didn’t know any better lol

4 Likes
48

Why reduction? Just for the sake of reduction?

Why not award it to long term holder / staker, the loyal community over time instead ?

Some staker are just coming in to stake for the sole purpose to stake to earn for the ASR or whatever reward… Which they bought large chunk prior before 1 or 2 days, and then vote, and then unstake and sell, in which what had happen last round. They still get 1 big chunk of ASR / Rewards.

Those who loyally stake all the way till the end of ASR, is like hmm…

Anyway… proposal made, not really a fan of supply reduction, would prefer awarding it to really long term loyal staker that stake & vote since the start of this vote thing that didnt unstake. Those are the community that true to it, that stay with JUP all the way. Don’t you think?

4 Likes
49

The truth is, most stakers are trying to take advantage of the compounding effect of multiple asr rewards. Like a snowball effect. We need more ASR rounds i say

5 Likes
50

Im curious as to what the reduction would do to the voting “power” of our existing native staked jupiter

4 Likes
51

In perspective it should not really change anything, as the supply reduction affects not your personal holdings while for the remaining system it affects all equal, not sure if I worded that right…

3 Likes
52

Please go to YouTube and listen to the Jupiter Call yesterday where @meow addressed clearly what this supply reduction is for & vice versa. He did address that clearly. There are a lot of other vital infos in that call. See link attached: https://www.youtube.com/live/xg0bumi71Hc?si=RRqEszqzSawmsHDU

4 Likes
53

I dont think it’ll affect that just yet, however, Given the jupuary teirs are geometicqlly rather than linear, its likely less jup will be staked compared to if there is no reduction

3 Likes
54

thanks for sharing buddy !

3 Likes
55

Good topic summary, I am just today voting my very first time Sir and this really helped do understand everything better.

My vote is not much, I only have 150 JUP this time, but I hope to contribute to the DAO with this.

Thank you for the work on this summary.

5 Likes
56

My feeling :

Even with the Supply reduction, I don’t believe in reducing incentives and rewards at all, I even think these will increase or remain at the same level, while increasing the requirement of criteria promoting commitment .

2 Likes
57

ok after re-reading this, im almost 99.9% sure the cons for supply reduction are just barely cons at all and those thinking a supply cut isnt a good idea genuinely need to rethink this. Everything in this article is pointing towards supply cut, the pros outweigh the cons in every scenario IMO…well done mate

2 Likes
58

actually, i sort of agree with this too, although i see the cons in just rewarding holders and loyal community members because they may certainly just dump or offload any extra jup into the market…they certaintly dont want people just dumping free jup they receieve

2 Likes
59

Screenshot_2024-08-01-19-55-43-069-edit_com.opera.browser
Screenshot_2024-08-01-19-55-43-069-edit_com.opera.browser1080×320 58.6 KB

my only concern really is the team-community % and I think a 70/30 ratio would have fixed some of the cons you enumerated l.

3 Likes
60

My actual Rewards were ~ 15% of my holdings

Let us assume I hold 1000-JUP
and 1-JUP = $1.00

If the proposal does not go through:

Airdrop = 15%

Held Amount = 1000-JUP

I receive 150 JUP from the airdrop

Which has a value of $150

If the proposal goes through,

Airdrop = 10.5% (30% reduction)

Held Amount = 1000-JUP

I receive 105 JUP fro the airdrop

which has a value of $105

NET: $45 decrease

In order for 105 JUP to have the same value as 150 JUP, JUP would need to appreciate ~ 43%

What raises the value of a Asset? An increased use case leading to higher adoption, (i.e. New Investors).

Why would a new investor hearing about a 1 time burn of 3 billion tokens and a decrease in future rewards NOW hop into the asset? They only thing they receive is a reduced airdrop.

What will increase the value is creating a good product that brings in adoption.

Seeing as their is no current plans of inflation, this is a net negative in the form of a reduced airdrop
and adding nothing but speculative conjecture.

If JUP is what we all believe it to be, or could be, it will appreciate that lost 43% and more so,

without sacrificing rewards.

4 Likes