Keep lilnouns going at 1 lilnoun every 15 min forever. The annual % increase effectively decreases annually, forever.
This gives us cashflow forever, while also giving ourselves an asset that can accrue value if our fungible token is the preferred coin in our ecosystem.
There are 8 billion people on the planet.
Steve Jobs once said you need 50 million devices in market to create a true platform ecosystem. We need at least 50 million lilnouns out there, at a minimum.
This response is off topic per the first post. Thank you for submitting another example for why this Discourse needs to be token gated per the 2nd highest viewed discussion in this form: Token-gating this forum for lilnouns holders - #9 by travsap. Interest and participation in general discussion is always appreciated if you’re offering information from a place of understanding or experience, or asking questions. But if you’re new to the project, have missed most of the discussion that’s already taken place, and then move into governance discourse to offer insight without understanding, and without any stake in the treasury or voting power, please don’t. It’s intrusive and distracting. The purpose of proposals is for those with voting power to vote on adjustments to the DAO that serve them, not you.
—
TLDR: Your response is patently false and you failed to read the first post — if you don’t believe in scarcity or a deflationary supply schedule, create another thread. This thread was explicitly for discussion seeking a vetted resolution for those who do believe a deflationary schedule is necessary to drive continued demand. NFT’s are tokens and currency. Currencies do not function without scarcity. What you’re proposing (printing Lil Nouns into oblivion because it’s a “constant source of cash flow” ignores basic supply and demand economics. What you’re suggesting here is equivalent to the dollar pretending to function as the world’s reserve currency while it’s exploited by and printed for a select few to inflate their wallets and wage war. The dollar has already been hyperinflated into oblivion and lost 99% of its purchasing power since inception due to inflation and leaving a fixed supply gold standard. Yes 99%. Please curb your ignorance in governance discourse when you fail to understand the topic of discussion.
I think you need to learn how to work with people my friend. The combative nature of all of your responses and the way you blatantly talk down to anyone who disagrees with you or tries bringing the conversation a new direction makes it impossible for anyone to want to collaborate with you.
Why are you so eager to push this thing through? It won’t take affect at this rate for another 3+ years? Take the time to have a meaningful discussion and try and see what others think. We clearly know you think already.
Should a separate thread be created along the lines of “Pro’s and Con’s for Deflationary Supply Schedule Implementation: All Lilnouners are welcome to express their thoughts.” ???
The answer to your question is written in the proposal:
“This four year timeframe affords the community a sizable window to backtrack if desired, while the immediate execution of the proposal drives immediate anticipation.”
“My proposal is to attract greater demand now, in the first 4 years”
“Just as Bitcoin’s four-year block reward cycle incentivizes demand and drives price / market cap appreciation by implementing a periodic halving, Lil Nouns should implement a similar constraint now to drive greater demand in the first four years. The community will hurry forward in anticipation as the implementation heightens interest, attracts more bids and most importantly grows the value of the treasury so that we can fund additional public goods and do more to propagate the meme.”
The first post expresses:
“If you do not believe the supply schedule should be made deflationary (given how quickly the supply is increasing), then please feel free to create another thread, please do not reply here.”