Between my last proposal (https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/596) and this one, an upgrade that was later (unfortunately) “corrected” clearly showed that reducing staking rewards and thus also the inflation rate leads to positive price development, because fewer tokens could be sold. Positive price development is vital for every project, as it not only guarantees its financing but also ensures the attractiveness needed to draw in and retain developers and investors.
Unfortunately, Kusama not only followed the same misguided path as Polkadot in the past (unlimited supply, high inflation, increasing the minimum commission rate), but is still continuing down this path, which—as everyone can see—is leading to increasingly precarious conditions and driving many away from Kusama.
That, my friends, cannot possibly be the goal, and it is a shameful failure. To correct this, I therefore propose that:
Between my last proposal (https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/596) and this one, an upgrade that was later (unfortunately) “corrected” clearly showed that reducing staking rewards and thus also the inflation rate leads to positive price development, because fewer tokens could be sold. Positive price development is vital for every project, as it not only guarantees its financing but also ensures the attractiveness needed to draw in and retain developers and investors.
Unfortunately, Kusama not only followed the same misguided path as Polkadot in the past (unlimited supply, high inflation, increasing the minimum commission rate), but is still continuing down this path, which—as everyone can see—is leading to increasingly precarious conditions and driving many away from Kusama.
That, my friends, cannot possibly be the goal, and it is a shameful failure. To correct this, I therefore propose that:
Threshold
Threshold