Discussion: Breaking the Token Burn vote into yearly votes

[SuperchainEco]

This thread aims to initiate a discussion around a non-binary alternative to the 100M LSK DAO burn proposal—specifically, breaking the token burn decision into seven yearly votes rather than a single all-or-nothing vote.

We believe this approach would empower LiskDAO to make more informed, context-aware decisions regarding LSK burns while keeping control in the hands of vpLSK holders.

Lisk DAO Treasury Accounting and Projections
To support this conversation, we’ve developed a Lisk Treasury and Governance dashboard (view here) to get a clear understanding of the current and anticipated resources of Lisk DAO and the Lisk ecosystem.

Overview of L2 treasury and ecosystem strategies
We’ve also compiled insights on how other L2 networks structure their treasuries and ecosystem strategies to drive growth and gain market share. Later this year, our team aims to produce a more detailed report on this topic.

Key Takeaways for Consideration:

• Ecosystem growth is essential. Chains frequently design user- and developer-focused reward programs to incentivize activity and enhance user experience.

• User incentive programs drive growth. Programs such as airdrops (widely adopted by L2s to reward usage) and DeFi incentives (e.g., Arbitrum’s STIP and Optimism’s SuperStacks) have demonstrably increased usage and ecosystem value.

• Development grants are key for nurturing native builders. They delivered via direct support or impact-based mechanisms (such as Optimism’s RetroPGF), provided critical resources for builders. Incubators and accelerators then help those projects scale, launch tokens, and further expand their onchain presence.

• Every L2 needs (costly) infrastructure. While less costly than operating a standalone blockchain’s costs, L2 blockchains still face multimillion-dollar annual infrastructure costs to ensure a stable, user-friendly network. This includes expenses for block explorers, dev tools, oracles, and key protocols. Without such infrastructure, blockchains struggle to attract users and developers.

• Blockchains benefit from economies of scale. As ecosystems grow, the relative cost of infrastructure and security declines. Aggressive ecosystem growth is not just strategic—it’s essential for increasing Lisk’s long-term impact and value.

Why yearly votes instead of 1 big vote

Allowing Lisk governance to vote on a 100M LSK burn demonstrates a strong commitment to decentralization. However, such a major decision also introduces significant (and potentially divisive) pressure on the ecosystem.So far, most of the discussion has not focused on evaluating various ecosystem growth strategies, but instead on the logistics of the vote itself—along with some unproductive finger-pointing.Our experience and research suggest that for any blockchain network to thrive and grow in value, it must deliver a unique and compelling ecosystem for both users and builders. Without adequate resources, this simply isn’t possible.

At the same time, we acknowledge that the L2 space is still emerging, and LiskDAO has yet to prove itself as a consistent value generator for the Lisk ecosystem.

Considering all of this, we believe the most constructive path forward is to break the 100M LSK burn into seven annual proposals, each offering multiple burn amount options. This would allow Lisk stakeholders to periodically evaluate whether additional LSK should vest to LiskDAO to fund further ecosystem growth—based on current context, performance, and evolving needs.

Our concrete proposal for the Token Burn votes
We propose to create the following votes:- December 1st, 2025 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2027 vest share (15M LSK)

- December 1st, 2026 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2028 vest share (15M LSK)
- December 1st, 2027 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2029 vest share (15M LSK)
- December 1st, 2028 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2030 vest share (15M LSK)
- December 1st, 2029 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2031 vest share (15M LSK)
- December 1st, 2030 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2032 vest share (15M LSK)
- December 1st, 2031 | Vote to decide if we burn the 2033 vest share (10M LSK)

Each vote would have the following structure:Should LiskDAO burn the vested tokens for the year 20xx?

Option 1. Yes
Option 2. No
Option 3. Abstain

Request for input
We believe this alternative token burn voting logic strikes a more balanced approach—allowing stakeholders to weigh the potential of LSK to fund ecosystem growth and value creation against the possible downsides of increased token circulation. These decisions can then be made on a yearly basis, taking into account the evolving state of the industry and the Lisk ecosystem.

We welcome stakeholder feedback on this proposed path and look forward to a healthy, forward-thinking discussion that serves the long-term interests of Lisk.

[Filmmaniak]

Your obligation is to burn 100M lisk tokens regardless of vote outcome and quorum reached or not reached. You increased max token supply from 150M to 400M. We discussed it with community and we already came to the conclusion that lisk 100M token burn vote must be done in 1st July 2025, we don’t accept any alternatives.

You suggested it, you announced it, you rescheduled it, now you have to do it don’t make excuses.

Don’t be greedy you don’t deserve any tokens DAO is well paid don’t scam us!

This is your proposal in hope to take part of 100M tokens… how dare you after all you did to lisk holders?

Lisk DAO don’t need ANY lisk tokens to operate, they have tons of lisk tokens already and tons to be unlocked. They made lisk token to be at all time low lsk/btc how dare you asking for more?

If you push this proposal I’m out and I will do everything I can to warn people that you are scammers.

I don’t accept changing this discussion into proposal by DAO team! You plan to push it regardless of community opinion, I know it already same as you did with rescheduling - entirely DAO team decissions.

Just to let everybody know - accepting this means that you agree that DAO will keep dilution of your tokens meaning that they will take your invested money instead of using their lisk tokens!

You will make x.com post about this soon, regardless of community will to burn 100M tokens.

@przemer already summed it up:

przemer

21d

The ~145M DAO Treasury LSK was forced on the community. No one had a say in this. This came at the expense of all holders prior to the L2 migration. For context, before the migration, the total LSK supply was ~150M tokens. Now it’s 400M. The dilution is over 60%, which is substantial.

I doubt anyone truly believes burning tokens will cause the price to increase significantly. Rather, people want to burn them to reduce the dilution that was forced upon holders. The LSK token has been under very strong selling pressure for many years, and printing hundreds of millions more tokens doesn’t help this situation.

It’s not as if the Foundation lacks its own funds. They simply opted not to use them, instead placing the risk on the community.

The community has suffered a lot. There hasn’t been any good news for years, and as a result, the community is jaded. Burning tokens is seen as a way to compel the team to spend funds more effectively and perhaps use their own resources.

There’s little use for the 100M LSK if its value continues to decrease. Moreover, witnessing how the 2.5M LSK was spent on an airdrop campaign, which resulted in the worst possible outcome and generated negative publicity, hardly inspires confidence that these additional funds will be managed effectively.

Even after a potential burn, the DAO would still possess 45M LSK, plus any tokens remaining unclaimed after May 2026. If this amount isn’t sufficient to rejuvenate the ecosystem, an additional 100M LSK created from further dilution certainly won’t help either.

Those 2 charts says all:

I’m waiting for this token burn for 1 year. You promised once, you rescheduled it and I have enough with you if you still cancel it. You guys are totally not trustworthy.

On behalf of all lisk holders: This post of yours is a proof that you are not listening to people and as DAO your only interest is to squeeze as much money from lisk investors as you can. I see this post of yours as clear sign of disrespect towards lisk community. I request this topic to be closed.

Face the facts, as DAO you achieved nothing so far to keep lisk price stable, moreover you even put us in the worst situation in the history of this project and it took you less than year. First prove us that you have positive result by fighting constant token price decline and charts will verify if your work is beneficial for us investors. So far we see no improvements in token price. We observe constant price decline for over 4 years and we can’t trust your promises after all those years. Don’t promise anything just do your work and don’t touch lisk holders money. You don’t need those 100M tokens, stop being shamelessly greedy.

[Innosaint]

Implementing annual votes allows the Lisk community to make informed decisions based on the ecosystem’s evolving needs and performance. This approach provides flexibility, enabling adjustments to be made in response to market conditions, technological advancements, and community growth. It also fosters continuous engagement, as stakeholders have recurring opportunities to participate in governance, reinforcing the decentralized ethos of the Lisk DAO.

But also, there are some challenges to this approach. Annual votes could lead to decision fatigue among community members, potentially reducing participation over time. The uncertainty of yearly outcomes might also hinder long-term planning for projects relying on DAO funding, as they cannot be assured of consistent support. Moreover, the administrative overhead of organizing and conducting annual votes could strain resources that might otherwise be directed toward development and innovation.

[Filmmaniak]

Stop using ChatGPT. I quit if they do it annual. All of us will quit. I’m already fatigued by holding since 2017 and now they propose 2031 date. Who cares? I withdraw and put money to something else if they do it. They will smuggle also one important thing - DAO will vote in those votes. They offered community to take part in decission making, rescheduled vote and now they want to split it to 7 pieces or how many? Like Lord Voldemort. They think that nobody will remember that they promised one 100M token burn vote without DAO and lisk team participation. Outcome will be that those partial votes will result in DAO voting against burning and 100M tokens will be stolen from community by DAO. If they will behave like that delisting in 2027 is guaranteed. Now they want to do everything to stop June 1st 100M token burn rescheduled by year voting. They will stop it if we won’t react and if they will succeed in this I quit immediately. Token price will tank after it like never before mark my words.

[Innosaint]

It’s not chatGPT. I made my research using some posts on Reddit and some previous posts

[Filmmaniak]

Please quote those reddit posts with their dates.

[Innosaint]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Lisk/comments/1dpplbt/lisk_community_vote_burn_or_allocate_100_million/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

June 27th 2024

[Filmmaniak]

How you know so much about lisk token burn potential outcome from lisk official post and 2 - 3 comments below it like: “burn, burn, burn”?? There is little to no information there only basics. Did you know that this vote was orginally planned to take place in 4th quarter of 2024 and this vote was rescheduled to 1st July 2025? Did you checked lisk token price from 27 June 2024? Don’t you think that current situation may be quite different now? I see that you are new here but how you would feel when someone was promising you token burn vote in 2024 then month before the vote rescheduled it by almost a year and in 2025 suggested you that it should be changed and split into 6 parts voting ending in 2032? Don’t you think it might be “a little” unprofessional and not trustworthy? If they could reschedule without community opinion they can cancel it and do with it whatever they want. Is this really decentralization?

Check what happened to lisk price when they rescheduled token burn voting. I know you may have hard time to find even when it was so let me help you:

Lisk burn or allocate rescheduling is bad

Let me explain. Community wants to burn 100m lisk tokens. "It gives the community a real chance to pass the proposal. " - what do you mean by that, I don’t get it. I thought the proposal had been already officially announced to take place from 25th Sept. to 1st Oct. 2024. Here are some articles about that as evidence: https://cointelegraph.com/press-releases/burn-or-invest-lisk-announces-date-for-community-vote-on-25-of-the-token-supply “Check tally.xyz and see how much of that power is cu…

Original 100M token burn proposal was scheduled to take place from 25th Sept. to 1st Oct. 2024. Here is the lisk chart from that period:

I know this chart may mean nothing but believe me that after lisk team announced rescheduling price of lisk went down compared to other altcoins. We lost something like 10 positions in market cap during that period. From Sept. 2024 to this day we lost 200+ positions in market cap. We are nowhere near same position when we were in Sept. 2024.

[SuperchainEco]

Hi @Filmmaniak

You seem to completely miss the point of Lisk DAO here. Superchain Eco, and by an extention the majority of operators of LiskDAO, are indepedent contributors.

Another negative pattern, is that you keep writing as if this is a “us vs them” situation, which it’s not. Lisk ecosystem, through Governance is now in charge. The good side of this means the ecosystem has the opportunity to take the lead and build something unique (which we’re trying hard to do). On the other hand, this also means that if the Ecosystem does not unite and collaborate, it is unlikely to grow.

You’re also making false statemtes, such as “You plan to push it regardless of community opinion”, which is the exact opposite of how it goes in practice.

Every large decision is currently made through Lisk DAO governance - which every vpLSK holder can participate (and most do) in.

I understand that you’re unhappy with the LSK price performance, but the only way to turn this around now is to COLLABORATE AND BUILD SOLUTIONS. If you want to help - please take your time to right concrete suggestions and thoughts. If you just want to rant, I do not think the Lisk Forum is the right place.

[Filmmaniak]

If I understood you correctly you say that DAO now is in charge.

“Superchain Eco, and by an extention the majority of operators of LiskDAO, are indepedent contributors.” - You want to mix them stating that for example Mona is the same as Innosaint. I’m talking about those DAO members who are benefiting from DAO token unlocks, normal users and investors are not part of lisk DAO, not in practice so yes, I think it is exactly “us vs them”, we are no equal here or if we are please give my missing DAO lisk tokens unlocks.

“The good side of this means the ecosystem has the opportunity to take the lead and build something unique (which we’re trying hard to do). On the other hand, this also means that if the Ecosystem does not unite and collaborate, it is unlikely to grow.” - you are suggesting that now you make decissions and I can only watch it happens. You are suggesting that I’m against collaboration and unity but I’m against fraud and wrong ideas.

You’re also making false statemtes, such as “You plan to push it regardless of community opinion”, which is the exact opposite of how it goes in practice. - Prove me that I’m wrong and you won’t cancel 100M lisk token burn.

Every large decision is currently made through Lisk DAO governance - which every vpLSK holder can participate (and most do) in. - Say it loud that lisk DAO want to interfere and take part in voting for lisk token burn that supposed to be given entirely for community decission.

I understand that you’re unhappy with the LSK price performance, but the only way to turn this around now is to COLLABORATE AND BUILD SOLUTIONS. - Community have choosen solution year ago and it is burning 100M lisk tokens. There is no better solution at this moment.

I don’t want to rant anybody, I’m writing my thoughts and telling you that you shouldn’t interfere in community decission. Secondly, you shouldn’t suggest to people that lisk token burn is bad and that there is artificial need of finding something else. You can’t treat people like that. Show some respect to lisk holders. You promised 100M lisk token burn vote, I’m waiting for token burn vote more than a year so deliver now or find excuses and make me quit.

[przemer]

Thanks, @SuperchainEco for the proposal and discussion. I find it a valid compromise. However, neither this proposal nor one for burning the 100M in one go will pass, since the community side of the DAO doesn’t have enough power.

What @Filmmaniak is missing is the fact that the community doesn’t have to wait for anyone to initiate the burning. At any point, if the community has enough power, they can create a burning proposal (anyone with 300k vP can do it) and burn the tokens without asking anyone. Those dates set by HQ are just to make people aware that a proposal is coming.

[Filmmaniak]

Saying very calmly, 100M token burn vote at once is the best even if we won’t reach quorum now, it is worth repeating instead of splitting it to bits and prolong in time. Rescheduling something to 2026,2027,2028,2029,2030,2031 - who wants that, really? My huge concern is that lisk DAO and lisk team shouldn’t interfere in this vote as it was announced long time ago. We could run this 100M burning vote every 3 months and see if audience is growing or no. At some point we should get quorum or delisting. It’s not my job to give DAO advices or ideas. Either you prove to everyone that the ecosystem is really growing and in a short time, or you lose everything and this 100M burn won’t even matter anymore. I will give you little tip: nobody want to wait until December 2026 for small 15M token burn vote, which once again is at risk of being rescheduled again and again.

Don’t be afraid to check how low voting volume will be without DAO and lisk team. This will be very good indicator for you to reconsider current state of this project and current number of active lisk holders.