I don’t think it was ever communicated whether metapebble is included in burn/drop. A large installed base attracts developers. Is metapebble included in this proposal?
1 Like
I would never support a proposal like this without addressing the elephant in the room. What is going to be done about all the investors that lost money during the whole Coinbase debacle? Maybe just maybe investors would be more to accept this proposal if more focus was on that as described in the 2021 wrap up. I don’t know the amount of coins that are now orphaned because of incompetence but im sure it might help pay for this DAO that is being pushed so hard and fast. As far as I can tell there is no useful MachineFi, only talks and roadmaps. Maybe produce the MetaPebble or maybe make the Ucam and other existing devices we were so excited about viable. Pay attention to what your investors are saying and be transparent about the actual Tokenomics. The core team got 15% of IOTEX supply off the rip. So do y’all hold Native or ERC-20? Deal with the issues before trying to squeeze proposals in with little to no benefit for long term stakers or investors in general. Be better than those other projects.
1 Like
“Drip” category - needed deleted a long time ago
This category not have real use case and more importantly!
Fund to attract new projects should also have been created a long time ago
Without new projects from other teams that are not related to IoTeX in any way, there will be no development for the project and for Network\Blockchain.
2 Likes
Also where alls older topics???
Why your del all info?
When on DEX will norm price - not currently x2 from buy to sell?
Or when we can see new good DEX? Not from IoTeX Team…
DEX like Osmosis on Cosmos-ecosystem!
We believe moving from the drip to a DAO makes sense, not sure decreasing the burn from 50% to 25% is good as it diverts from original amount to be burned.
In regards to future exploration of Burn similar to EIP-1559 we believe his is a bad idea on fixed supply network in the longer term, Ethereum is inflationary where as IoTeX is fixed, on ethereum more can always be minted. The longer term side effects will be a decreasing amount of IOTX with txs fees increasing as usage increases.
Summary
- Yes to DAO but only 25%
- No to decreasing burn (should remain at 50%)
- No to future plans on burns that do not have upper limit, burn drop had maximum amount to burn where as EIP-1559 would continously burn but without new issuance
5 Likes
We also prefer to keep burn at or nearer to 50%
Maybe option in the middle could be 33% each to burn, drop and DAO
2 Likes
Great suggestion to keep burn 50%.
But at the same time stakers still should receive bigger amount for drop since there will be less long term staking buckets and stale lock will be not useful feature
1 Like
Thanks for sharing your idea.
I can’t entirely agree with the proposal to take from the community and fund future projects, otherwise, the team will share their % of tokens with the DAO.
Think about all those investors who stake 91+ days to be burn&drop eligible… and today they look on that worthless lock period and assume why don’t they sell IOTX at coinbase pump 20+ cents per IOTX.
“Never disrespect your community”
1 Like
Hello everyone. 
Here’s a short summary on what has been voted and discussed in the past week:
Voters: 65. Yes (66%) and No (34%). (at the moment of this post)
Be sure to tune in to our IoTeX town-hall this Friday 19th, where we will go over this feedback.
Points for further debate, consideration, and accord:
- The Drip: There’s mainly consensus on the Drip being a good idea that could’ve had more usability. Sentiment is mixed but across most points refers to having a closure to this program which benefits all involved stakeholders. To address this, the core team plans to add an additional action item to the proposal that defines how the unused 50M IOTX that was allocated to “drip” will be utilized, this information will be officially shared soon.
- Deflation: There are important points on the adjustment for the Burn and how it may affect deflation of the token. Other ideas on allocation percentages have been shared.
- MachineFi DAO: There’s consensus on having a healthy MachineFi ecosystem with active value-creating initiatives. Most comments point towards increasing the number of quality projects in the network to nurture positive value flows in its tokenomics, and some of the comments challenge and/or propose alternative means of funding new initiatives.
Please remember that this proposal is still in the ‘ideation’ stage and will go through as many rounds of feedback needed until we see enough alignment to turn it into a fully fledged proposal. The IoTeX core team will continue working to integrate the comments of this debate and strive for balance. The governance process phases can be reviewed here.
5 Likes
I believe they are in still in the midst of migrating the contents of the old forum to this v2
3 Likes
Larry mentioned on town hall that the DAO could also fund drips or similar based on proposal by community.
There is also further iteration foundation is preparing so might address some of community feedback.
2 Likes
Need to keep the yield high for long term stalking ot iotx will drop in price
1 Like
@anwar139 is right. A lot of the content will migrate and older content has simply been in Archive mode while we implemented the upgrades. We have now made this Archive visible to everyone for reference. Thanks for your feedback!
3 Likes
Dear IoTeX team,
any updates regarding this proposal?
1 Like
lol funny bugger aren’t you
Didn’t mommy teach you good manners?
Hello everyone.
We are fast approaching the vote on this proposal having surpassed the required upvotes with 95 votes and >50 “Yes” (you can review the governance process here). We’ve also taken into account your comments and integrated your feedback. Please take a moment to review updates above in bold/italic.
This proposal will be voted on soon! Please continue providing your thoughts during the voting process. 
A couple of thoughts:
(1) The Meta Pebble has over 400,000 signed up in the first round. Do each of these potentially count as one device? Wouldn’t this jump the burn drop into at least phase 8?
(2) Staking yield on Iotex looks low relative to what is discussed on ETH. Maybe outside the scope of this proposal, but a response to complaints from the investors- bumping up the yield will help.
2 Likes