I would like to propose that we have a vote on keeping either 500K or 1mil FLASH for the XIO index, and burning the remaining tokens (after Zachary has claimed his tokens)
Edit: for those who aren’t already aware, around 9 million tokens were minted on 31st March.
The reason to restrict this is to ensure that a conflict of interest does not tempt people into keeping enough FLASH that we damage the project.
Where is the conflict of interest?
We have a huge amount of FLASH minted. Any extra FLASH dilutes the value of your FLASH holdings, this is generally not good for holders. The more we keep the more we are diluted.
The FLASH we keep will be put into the XIO index. This is directly benefiting XIO to the detriment of FLASH.
A vote will be held and 100% of those voting will be XIO holders.
Less than 100% of voters will also be holding FLASH.
This creates an actual conflict of interest, because the dilution of FLASH adds value to XIO.
I understand that most people who hold XIO also hold FLASH, but that does not mean there is no conflict of interest. It just means you are inclined to vote on something that hurts FLASH less than you would if you were an XIO-only holder.
It’s important to recognise that the best case scenario for FLASH is a neutral outcome (all FLASH burned), whereas the WORST case scenario for XIO is a neutral outcome (all FLASH burned means no benefit to XIO), see how this creates a conflict?
It’s important to heavily restrict the options of how much FLASH should be kept, so that we reduce the potential impact of this conflict.
Even keeping 1mil FLASH will dilute your holdings by almost 10%. Ask yourself, would you be happy to donate 10% of your holdings directly the the XIO index? Because in effect this is what is happening.
Optics are important here. XIO should be a governance token but should not massively benefit to the detriment of the tokens it governs. This will not be attractive to newcomers.
Apologies for the rant, I feel very strongly about this. Would be interesting to hear others views.