no misunderstanding, i’m a fan of burning .
The total supply must be down .
no misunderstanding, i’m a fan of burning .
This is not an improvement to Bitdao. Better stake to burning, lower the max supply and make each Bitdao more scare.
the problem with burning is that it destroys value. These $BIT tokens could be better used to improve projects like Mantle and maybe do partnerships with other projects and bring them into the DAO, thereby increasing the size of the $BIT community.
If $BIT should be burned - it should be burned through EIP-1559 type initiatives on Mantle as this type of burning is driven by on-chain results versus burning tokens to purely increase value.
At BitDAO, we have planned some very interesting approaches to getting other ecosystem players involved in the DAO.
There could be more value built by creating more utility for $BIT versus contracting supply.
With Mantle, we will use $BIT as the gas token, ecosystem token and staking token. We will be able to add far more utility and value accrual to the token and put it in the hands of builders and network users.
For building a healthy token economy we need to create more utility for the $BIT token and this requires a healthy supply so that we can get the token in the hands of more community members, who can then use the token across the dApps building on Mantle.
To attract more people to the $BIT token, we can also invest in and build more projects. eg. Mantle.
At Mantle, we already have 35+ large projects deployed and many more on the way. Recent hackathons have yielded 250+ high quality projects already deployed on the testnet. With mainnet launch, we have have hundreds of projects go love, each using the $BIT token in some way.
Through this, we can create far more value for the $BIT token than by contracting supply.
It sounds great, but we need to wait for mantle mainnet launch to ensure it can really return value to $BIT community and increase $BIT usage. (Actually we have no schedule for mainnet launch)
For now, it’s too early to make an proposal to let bitDAO running alone.
The roadmap is there on the Mantle website - https://mantle.xyz/
We are planning for the mainnet for end of Q2 early Q3.
good news ever heard from Mantle, kudos to the team effort, thank you all
Currently the utility of the $BIT token is limited to governance on the BitDAO forums.
Value for the token has to be created by adding more utility to the Token - by using it as the native, staking and ecosystem token in Mantle. It will also be used in other projects which are connected to BitDAO.
This way we can create far more demand for the token than through burning based price action.
Please continue to burn as announced: BitDAO
That is an extremely wrong judgment of you, the total supply is too large, people will never pay attention and never want to pay for this project, the project only needs to burn the total supply to 1 billion dong. price will surely increase.
The exchange wants to increase the price of bits but still wants to have more bits. Because the input to bitdao is still under the control of Bybit
Actually, Mr. Arjun is right, keep burning without utility making $BIT more useless as it is just only a burning token. And if with utility built to make $BIT more useful, max supply would not be the concern,
I would say that the concern of current BitDAO is how they going to maximize their advantage of Bit’s utility to the community, and what if the supply is not matching to the public demand, how they going to make an adjustment on the supply.
Focus on BitDAO how to increase the market value by adding utility to $BIT rather than focus on 10b supply. UTILITY WOULD BE THE FIRST CONCERN TO CURRENT SITUATION.
There’s really undeniably leading bybit. But now, Bybit doesn’t have a clear direction - only selling BIT slowly.
You still don’t understand the current problem, the top problem is how people hold this token, but when looking at the total supply is so large, they will covet to come to your technology.
That’s why there is a misconception there that Bybit = BitDAO, when you look at the actual situation, BitDAO is a DAO that contains Mirana, Windranger, Mantle Team, Bybit, and other investors, so it does not belong to Bybit and because Bybit holds more than 50% bit of total supply which make others think that too centralized, and this is why this discussion is to make some adjustment to a better situation (Reduce power from Bybit and provide a more decentralized vision to the community).
We can’t deny that Bybit has made a lot of funding contributions to BitDAO, and even labor contributions. BitDAO is currently focusing on Mantle Network which might build a new ecosystem to BitDAO and even Bybit itself, so lets us be patient to what will happen after the Mantle Network launch.
Actually, if you look at ARB or other L2 coins, they also have a large supply, and because people join to attend the ARBDAO that makes it more valuable, so actually, we can try to think how to attract more people to join BitDAO and make $BIT more utility. For example, gas fees from Mantle Network.
token price high and supply high is already a fact, the important is how the team is going to overcome the past issue and bring new best outcome to the community.
SUPPLY IS JUST A NUMBER THAT CAN BE DONE WITH ADJUSTMENT, BUT MARKET VALUE NEEDS TO BE BASED ON THE POTENTIAL OF THE TOKEN AND THE ECOSYSTEM ITSELF.
The suggestion above is that we are completely separate from bybit, and will lose the ability to use $BIT for launchpad and launchpool purposes… get users.
- Invest in something meaningful like PleasrDAO.
- Let what’s good, then do better - suggest more useful problems for BitDao.
- If you want Bybit to change from burning every month exactly, it must be more than 120m BIT a lot to a smaller number from 120m Bit. Why not just go straight to BitDao once. After a few months, it changed again.
I think you got misunderstood to this discussion actually, Bybit never said that want to separate with BitDAO, the reason why this discussion come out is that Bybit might contain more than 50% voting power to BitDAO and that is an issue which Bybit can control the entire BitDAO, so the halving system able to reduce the power from Bybit and also provide more voting power to retailer and new users, which is more friendly to the outsider, and even halving system ended, Bybit might still hold 3.2b $BIT
and will also become the largest holder in BitDAO, so there is no point to worry about Bybit whether want to leave BitDAO or not.
Try to imagine that you invest over a hundred million in a DAO and you want to leave without any revenue received, is it a good deal to the investor itself? If Bybit wants to leave BitDAO the best choice is to OTC all their BIT or sell to the market, but they don’t do it.
BITDAO WILL BECOME MORE DECENTRALIZED AS MOST OF THE VOTING POWER IS SEPARATELY REASONABLE.