I would agree with you that the value of those projects to the Tezos ecosystem is extremely questionable. Nevertheless, this is not “misappropriation of funds” and the Tezos foundation is the main or only sponsor of many good things for the ecosystem as well (such as funding for the development teams Nomadic Labs, Marigold, Functori etc.).
I never said it was a misappropriation of funds
TF is the main sponsor of many good things for the ecosystem, however iirc it still holds hundreds of millions of dollars from the ico participants, the main sponsors of TF
That’s why personally I’d be happy to see this thing pass, if TF gets 0.2-0.3% x their 100M tez stake it’s just 300k tez a year, not much
Got the feeling that most of people buying crypto don’t look at protocol details or quality. They are just attracted by rewards rate. So give high reward and high inflation gives more output than fiar low rewards and fair low inflation or even 0
Just pragmatic, not judging what is the smart way to do it
Hey as I can see, the higher the market cap, the more people care about token emissions
- Eth ultra sound money (+ burn to make the token supply almost fixed) - this was shilled on Twitter much more than the tech of POW → POS
- Btc halving narratives
Here tezos would go for a triple halving (reducing emissions by 87.5% or so)!!
I do think some people don’t really understand money printing and would like 3-4% APR from thin air but is the net buying pressure from them > selling pressure of the unnecessary tokens from everyone else?
My guess would be the people interested by APR are in the tail (lots of small bags), while people with size would be smart enough to look at tokenomics
1 Like
Relying on fees to reward validators is naive. Let’s not go down the Cardano route of nonsense.
What “current issue” not already being addressed is more important than issuance? Let me guess… you want to pull levers to unsustainably make price go up at any cost. Again, let’s not stoop down to Cardano and Solana type tactics that would set tezos down the wrong path just to appeal to moon chasers.
Tezos should always choose the smart and sustainable path, and play the long game. The tech is getting there and we are on the verge of scaling to support onboarding really large use cases.
Time and time again the past few years other chains and trends have been exposed while tezos growth has been steady and organic.
Stop looking at the price and emotionally reacting to it.
1 Like
Tezos is a smart-contrat platorm and TF is making efforts to attract devs, users… in this sense.
Tezos is also a product consisting in programable money like Bitcoin, however Bitcoin doesn’t have smart contracts but the market appreciates its non-inflationary design.
Products are valuable as much as market see interest on them, no one will engage with Tezos as programable money if it has infinite inflation… it is not sustanaible as “reserve of value”. Also, people using Tezos as reserve of value can be turned on smart contracts adopters afterwards, it is not exclusive.
We can play the long term way as smart contract platform, the long term way as reserve of value… or both. Why not trying to attract both niches and creating sinergies from both? It should not be negative from a baker rewards perspective if it is done properly.
1 Like
I like it! Is it perhaps a good idea to couple this with some mechanism for slashing non-voting bakers? 
Seems this will create a larger divide between bakers and users, and perhaps harder to influence votes for users and create a more entrenched system long-term? 
1 Like
Adding this Thread from FounderJabba about the inflation topic - just to keep it here in the discussion
https://twitter.com/FounderJabba/status/1614002214577528832
edit: the topic is getting traction, great!
Here another tweet thread about this discussion
https://twitter.com/alisis_official/status/1614045836249284608
We need more! 
2 Likes
I am a fairly small baker. In my 16 month of operation I earned 7.7 tez in network fees. That is certainly not something i could sustain on. Without baking rewards. How would that change?
How would small baker be able to run?
If we’re overpaying in the current model, we can lower the current model and expect it to matriculate into adaptive inflation at some future point after several decreases to emissions with current model and after seeing the intended outcome to market performance along the way.
If we can get some sense of consensus around this idea, we can make Tezos much more predictable and exciting to look forward to for everyone. This level of consensus for a future change can be the fulcrum of a loose “economic roadmap” we can use to bring about the same outcome as Adaptive Inflation tries to bring on another level.
There is no reason to impose severe economic shocks to our system in the short term on a hunch that the new way will be better. We can instead use this as an opportunity to make Tezos more predictable and exciting to look forward to while still accomplishing the same goals and giving people the thing they’ve been asking for the longest time. Our inflation is not the #1 reason people part with their tez when they do.
How do we address the possibility that this change, especially if rushed, will not result in a worse governance outcome for the chain? We’re implicitly assuming full health on the governance front when proposing this change. Are we really at full health of governance discussions and process? Are we ready to just upturn the whole economic staking consensus and baking/reporting logistics for all bakers in a rushed manner without something solid to point to or anchor around?
Another twitter thread regarding Adaptive Inflation. We are getting good engagement here! And a wide discussion is needed! https://twitter.com/dmitrytez/status/1614284816224247809
https://twitter.com/BakingBenjamins/status/1614094963314405376
https://twitter.com/BakingBenjamins/status/1614293966886768642
Lets start a hashtag to easy identify related posts or discussions on twitter! #adaptiveInflation or # tezflation? 
3 Likes
We should implement in the next protocol upgrade disabled. And be able to activate it automatically by block/voted
5 Likes
Is there any example that reducing the baking rewards, will increase the price automatically? I believe the price is a market action and we should let the market decide it. If current inflation is high so be it, the baking rewards are enjoyed by both bakers and delegators.
Who are we trying to appease with the lower inflation model?
What happens if the price doesn’t appreciate even after reducing inflation by applying this model or any other model? will we be changing to another model?
If we want to prevent people from selling Tezos, then TF should directly start Defi staking pools/farms with a longer lock-in period(6 months to 1 year or more) against tzbtc /Sirius tokens. It will improve the liquidity for these tokens and make sure Tezos get locked for a longer time.
We should focus more on bringing new projects/people to tezos and supporting existing projects rather than tweaking the economics of the protocol. Because by focusing on inflation, it seems we have already accepted that there is no other way to prop up the price of Tezos.
1 Like
Why not both models?
1 Like
Because by focusing on inflation, it seems we have already accepted that there is no other way to prop up the price of Tezos.
I don’t get why when we propose to do “B”, some people assume that we give up on “A”. Sounds like a false dichotomy for me, we shall do A, and we shall do B, because both A and B are helpful.
We are actively working on launching new DeFi dapps to Tezos (“A”). But I also believe that adaptive inflation “B” can be very positive, and hence we should do it too.
1 Like
I want to clarify the earlier statement where “it seems” is the keyword. My argument is Inflation is not that bad and we need to find innovative ways to use it in a more productive way.
Let’s take Litecoin ( fixed supply hence a deflationary asset) vs Dogecoin ( fixed emission, hence inflationary). Now, which coin sits on the top of the rankings?
So rather than focus on emission and baking rewards, we should focus on the effective utilization of the rewards.
As per the current proposal, if the rewards for delegator decrease, they may move towards CTEZ rather than delegating which in turn will lead the smaller bakers to bribe delegators with more stake rewards just to meet the minimum stake or shut the shop. In the end lesser decentralization. Even with the current inflationary rewards, few bakers have left because they couldn’t keep up with constant updates to the protocol. Then we are at the mercy of large bakers.
So my suggestion would be better to leave the inflation as it is and focus on building a defi protocol/ using the existing defi apps to create a farm that will reward users in stable coins for locking their tez (so that users don’t feel the urge to sell). At least in that case, we can see a surge in TVL.
Let’s take Bitcoin ( fixed supply hence a deflationary asset) vs Tezos ( fixed emission, hence inflationary). Now, which coin sits on the top of the rankings?
So rather than focus on emission and baking rewards, we should focus on the effective utilization of the rewards.
You see what I did there? Cherrypicking examples makes no sense. There is no right or wrong in this debate. And inflation is not THE only problem but it is part of the equation.
I like the idea that Baking Benjamins posted here: Slow adaption to test waters before going to adaptive inflation. https://twitter.com/BakingBenjamins/status/1614293966886768642
Is it
1 Like
This proposal increases the rewards of bakers as compared to delegators. It would almost certainly increase the number of bakers and improve decentralisation. In fact, I would probably become a baker if this proposal was adopted.
2 Likes
Hi,
Not sure how it will benefit decentralization if you read these lines ,
In other words, the proposal discourages any additional baker from getting added by decreasing the rewards exponentially.
There are only 150 public bakers with a combined staking of less than 35% of the total staked Tezos. Rest 65% is with private bakers, foundation, and exchanges.
Also, the rewards should not be distinguished for ‘Tez at risk’ and delegator as both are for securing the network. Also, the rewards to delegate are not just for staking but also for taking part in governance. In on-chain governance, delegates also play a role else it will be left out only to the people who can run nodes.
Since the inflation rate is dependent on the staked Tez, any entity running a private bakery can stake high enough to decrease the inflation thereby forcing public bakeries to shut as it will be uneconomical for public bakeries and delegators.
Also once the proposal is passed, it will be hard to reverse as it will be against the interest of the large bakers and in Tezos only bakers have say in the on-chain governance.
In summary, from a delegator perspective, this proposal benefits only private bakers and public bakers with a large number of delegators and is completely detrimental to smaller bakers and in turn detrimental to decentralization. It can also lead to predatory practices and more importantly it will be highly irreversible.
Adaptive inflation discussion with ArthurB on Thursday the 26th at 3 pm EST / 8 pm UTC on Blockchain Evolved Show:
https://twitter.com/BlockchnEvolved/status/1615870392370872321
4 Likes
