Proposal to freeze and burn B1 tokens

  • I believe it is in disservice to the general token holders to not freeze and burn B1 tokens. The 80 percent of tokens that were frozen of late claimers has caused enough dissatisfaction to many eosio holders. Even the airdrops like that if eosdac and Telos have not allocated any 100 million tokens to B1. Since B1 is a pure profit motive company which so far has not shown interest in supporting the eosforce ecosystem, I suggest the following each of which may be individually and collectively implemented together.

    1. Freeze and burn B1s 100 million tokens or reallocate them to EOSForce foundation. Eosforce may rather use allocate those tokens for next 10 years to expand developer support and enhance ecosystem of eosforce.

    2. As a goodwill gesture, release the 80 percent of locked tokens up to a maximum of 30,000 tokens. The tokens of early claimants who claimed before the lock was introduced should not be affected. The rest of tokens above 30,000 of each account in claimants after the lock was introduced and all tokens not claimed will be burnt after a 1 month redemption period. (Even Telos has capped token allocations to 40,000). We better do this 30,000 capping in new accounts to prevent whales and other token holders from dumping enmasse.

    3. The upto 30,000 tokens released will unlock only gradually over 10 months at rate of 10 percent each month. This is to prevent dumping.

    4. We need to discuss how to fund eosforce development and marketing efforts using the 100 million tokens frozen and reallocated from B1s allocation.

    5. Aggressively seek more BPs for standby roles from across world other than just China.

    6. A single token model of EOSC across all the relay, FORCEIO and other DSP related infrastructure would be best solution. Having multiple types of tokens across different network components will make it more fragmented. It is in best interests of eosc token valuation to keep a single token across whole system.

    7. with BCH , IBC and cross chain architecture implementation, I would suggest also that EOsforce may be renamed for better branding. Case in point Worbli, Telos, BOS etc.. calling yourself eosforce only makes you look like rebels. ANT renaming to NEO brought more name recognition and better branding to it. So this should be seriously thought about.

    I hope we can discuss these items in next BP meeting and come to a quick conclusion on these matters. There is a lot of good stuff happening with eosforce..

Log in to reply