Counterargument Proposal: Lisk Should Invest Excess Tokens into an Ecosystem Fund

[przemer]

@dominic

• What initiatives would you propose to make the DAO fund sustainable in addition to shared sequencer revenue @przemer?

the obvious ones:

• A portion of the ecosystem fees goes to the DAO. You can use the PassApp wallet for this, with features like account abstraction, etc. and push it as a default ecosystem wallet

• The DAO could provide liquidity to various pools and earn from the fees. Unfortunately, the DAO currently holds only LSK.

• NFTs can fund the DAO, either by minting them or by taking a percentage cut from every future trade.

@dominic

but it’s worth sharing again to dispel this notion that change in tokenomics has changed anything thus far. This chart starts before the public announcement of the change in early April.

It’s true that the announcement/minting didn’t have a significant impact. However, any impact at this stage would be purely speculative since the tokens haven’t entered the market yet. Given that Lisk is not currently in the spotlight, speculative movements are naturally reduced. Similarly, I don’t expect any major reaction after burning them, as they aren’t being bought from the market and then burned.

That said, those tokens will eventually enter the market if we decide to use them, and it’s undeniable that they will have an impact. We’re just assuming that the growing ecosystem will be able to absorb them.

I’m curious, though… what is your actual vision for these additional tokens? It seems that, in your view, the 45M LSK (plus unclaimed tokens) isn’t sufficient.