I also agree that it is very important to leave fees changeable via a DAO vote!
I believe that lowering the taxes will helpnthe project grow much better. 3% tax is alot to whales and 7% is not investable for most whales
This proposal has passed the Roundtable of Dogs review and is being moved to Snapshot for on chain voting.
The official Snapshot vote is live and can be found here - Snapshot
I do not agree with lowering the taxes for entry into the K9 finance DAO:
Doing so just lets the token get bought up by day traders to, “do what they will,” with the token. This creates too much noise in the Market price for K9, and will only make the token more unstable in the long run. I will disagree with any changes to the Token tax, and will want the tax to remain the same, until after quarter 3 results come in.
If this change goes into effect it will only discourage major institution involvement with this token. Seeing how, before we even launch the token and gathering important data for future movements, we’ve already made changes to the lite paper; creating uncertainty and distrust with the token.
I know that these changes can get more retail in the door, but I fear that most of them are only looking for a profit margin instead of achieving our goal of getting the transaction costs down.
I disagree and wish to have the vote option of “no change” to be included or added to the proposal.
I love the 0 buy and 3 sell. It will bring the market to k9 and bring the shib whales… someone said it was not good because it would make the coin unstable. Incase you dont know the whole market is unstable. We need whales in k9 to get k9 ton1 cents. K9 to 1 cent is the true shiba inu dream . Not the original shina inu going to 1 cent. Its certain this willnhave a higher market cap than bone. The lower the price the higher the market cap. When the whales notice this we will 3x in a few days and 30x by xmas
I’m pretty new to the space but I can see the value of taxation as it relates to the project. What about just a 0.5% buy tax to gate the ne’er-do-wells, yet not be prohibitive to new investment?