Just making a note that you’re talking with the lead developer of the L1. He would know more than anyone what the code is doing. I also read his interpretation of the text to match what is written.
Yes, but so were the entire allocations of the premine to begin with. Should we also completely reallocate these buckets? These tokens were promised to the community bucket as part of the airdrop program. Some continuity of decisions is important, and to me this falls under that umbrella, since it’s talking about a promise of moving money that has been made.
These kinds of decisions are critical between administrations of any kind. Even when a country has a revolution, most new governments choose to honor debts of the previous administration rather than default on them. This is because consistency of financial promises is the most important signal to give in order to have effective access to money markets. They would not be loaned to if the lenders didn’t get their money back, and rebuilding your government would be a get-out-of-debt free card that would make such lending impossible to justify.
We’re not a government, but we are a financial system. We’re distilled promises. So we need to act like it.
Now, community tokens can be put toward community purposes. As they are becoming community tokens, you could argue instead “it is in the community’s interest to take a subset of the community tokens and burn them”, I suppose, but I don’t see that being the case here.
So, let’s review the proposal to burn a bunch of community tokens in the amount that are left over from the airdrop: I don’t see any real benefit to doing this. The amount of unclaimed airdrop tokens is still being projected/calculated (it’s going to depend on attrition over the remaining months) but the current amount is somewhere around 400 million.
400 million is a great deal for one person, but it’s only 1.9% of the entire 21 billion initial target. Further, these are not tokens that are on the active market for trading. You couldn’t buy them right now if you wanted to because they are not for sale, and very little is being spent right now-- just occasional bounty payouts.
That means they’re not meaningfully affecting the price, and burning them would be a stunt. It might temporarily bump the price on the news, since, yes, sometimes stunts get attention. But it’s a permanent decision for a short burst of attention and a minimal change in price. It doesn’t make sense to me.
Also once again noting that these are my opinions and not necessarily the opinions of the council at large. I haven’t asked them and they haven’t told me their thoughts.