After reading @MrLightspeed’s imput i actually would like to withdraw my say in allowing a burn since it results in a waste.
4 Likes
I disagree. No other comments.
1 Like
I’ve really been on the fence about this one…but no longer…I’m not opposed to burns but a burn day from the treasury I don’t feel is the best use of treasury funds.i believe we could get a better bang for our buck. I feel it will be a very short lived marketing strategy. A long term burn mechanism would be the best approach in my opnion
5 Likes
I support the proposal, not because of any price impact it might have, but because it might generate activity around the event much like the BTC halving. One of the arguments against fiat is that typically there is too much of them in circulation. BTC maxis like to stress that it is deflationary hence it’s a better store of value. Making a commodity scarcer over time has economic benefits.
3 Likes
Making a commodity more scare could give it more value. OPEC uses this to great effect by cutting supply of oil to arrest price decline, stabilize price or even increase it.
It would have been nice if this was in the Litepaper or in the roadmap. However, that’s why there is a DAO and a voting process. If holders have input in the process, then it’s legit.
3 Likes
After a discussion on this in the chat yesterday with Funk, I reverse my position and support the burn if…
-
It does not take funds that would be used for marketing, development or exchange listings.
-
Uses a targeted marketing campaign to make sure the word gets out to the shib/meme/erc20 armies about it.
It would also be pretty beneficial to standup a page that shows scheduled future burns as well as a past burnt total. Something that could be used to snap a quick screen shot to promote on social media fast and easy.
Burn Baby Burn 
I’m in!
5 Likes
This is a great idea! great way to create scarcity. I’m all in!
2 Likes
There’s much to consider with token burns, not just the act itself but how we execute it. A burn will decrease the quantity of $KNINE, true, but an essential aspect right now is to demonstrate to those in favor of burning that our community truly intends to reduce the circulating supply. I’m still in favor of burning, but perhaps, as some have suggested, we should consider reducing the amount or sourcing it from a different pool than marketing?
Also, a shout-out to Mr. Lightspeed’s excellent X-space discussion with Shane about six(+/-) months ago, where they delved into the mechanics of token burns. It’s incredibly insightful and well worth a listen if you want to understand the impact and strategy behind burns more deeply.
6 Likes
Shorter the supply in circulating tokens, the demand for these tokens will increase, and so will the value. All in all, this is a great initiative as it will create more publicity surrounding K9. I’m super excited for this, and like I mentioned before I support this 100%.
2 Likes
Lighting one of a project"s primary resources on fire…? I’m not sold…
3 Likes
It may be important to understand the rationale behind the decision for this project to mint almost 1 trillion tokens. We all see the numbers in the whitepaper understand they’ll be in circulation at some point over the next year+, and we will continue to get questions from interested parties on this question. Maybe an FAQ document to support our mods and outreach would help.
2 Likes
Who doesn’t love BURNS? But I suggest we find a different way to burn instead of using treasurey funds
1 Like
Great suggestion! All communities love burns.
1 Like
I am for all the burns since they fit the spirit of the Shib ecosystem.
2 Likes
i say nay using treasury funds
3 Likes
3. Annual KNINE Burn - PROPOSAL MODIFIED + PASSED
33% of Roundtable voted yes to passing Annual KNINE Burn proposal
22% of Roundtable voted no to passing Annual KNINE Burn proposal
60% of Roundtable voted yes, but reduce total amount by 10x KNINE (PASSED)
Takeaway - The Roundtable discussed the importance of their responsibilities on the panel being to protect the DAO treasury to be used to meet the DAO mission statement, which is to bring DeFi to Shibarium. Shima explained that tokens that do not get burned can be used to increase the APY on the K9 DAO BONE Crusher product. The Roundtable questioned how much marketing value could come from this burn, and if it was worth the initial proposed number of tokens. A vote was had to reduce the total number of tokens in the proposal and passed. The burn amount, instead of 4.1 billion, will be 410 million in the vote due to concerns of proper treasury management and the expectation among DAO members to potentially burn the same amount each year.
This thread will stay open to allow ongoing questions from community to be answered, and for implementation updates to be provided assuming the proposal passes Snapshot voting - found here.
5 Likes