Degen

when someone deploys a clanker, a portion of the fees goes to the creator — but the bigger cut goes to clanker itself.
over time, they've stacked a massive pile of community tokens through fees alone (which i assume they won't sell).

now imagine if they burned all those creator tokens and only kept the $CLANKER in their vaults.
would be nice.

@clanker /jazz /foodnyc what more does one need

Mint, Spin & Win! | Join Our Live Games on Monday Wednesday & Friday @ 3PM EST | Powered by $BETR. CA: 0x051024B653E8ec69E72693F776c41C2A9401FB07

artist · creative director at @rainbow — /groupies · /yon-experience

No, imagine if they instead earmarked these tokens to support creators and artists via mint incentive protocols like boost dot xyz, layer 3 and (shameless self-shill) @betrmint.

This is the win-win-win arrangement I tried to pitch proxy on but we never quite got there. I still believe it’s a huge positive sum opportunity. 

@dish @btayengco bang my line when the oceans calm a little 😂

noun seven three zero | onchain experimentation maxi @ zerorights.media, zeropod.xyz, @betrmint, the /yellow collective

how have you seen these types of distributions actually impact the projects?

for example, i deposited some $GDUPI on warpslot, and while i've seen a lot of people casting about it when they won tokens, there hasn't been much beyond that (i loved it but there was no real impact imo).
it's fun, sure — but does it bring in quality users?
is there really a difference between someone selling, and the balance being so small that it just sits in a wallet forever?

rounds could be a solid approach, since they get people creating content for the token — but again, i'm not sure why clanker should be the one running those.
that's why i think they could just burn the tokens, and let creators run these kinds of plays themselves.

Data shows that people actually rarely sell tokens received as mint boosts (likely because of the small balances and the perceived speculative upside.) And the distribution effects would be huge. 

(Also you don’t need to do the whole amount either.)

I also remain pretty unconvinced that most market participants really understand or appreciate the “public good” aspect of token burns. And if they don’t, then the burns are just a waste really.

the only issue i see here is the potential sell pressure — they're sitting on a huge stack of tokens (more than the creators themselves).
personally, i'd rather see those tokens burned to benefit the people who've been holding all this time.

after all, creators already got our cut — we can run our own incentive protocols, rounds, or whatever we want to do with them, as most of us are not looking to sell either.

Jordan Oram - Empire Builder Co-founder 🏛️ | No-code tools to help you go from Dream to Empire | Supporting Creators, Builders & Founders 🧉

/glanker

Yes I owe you a post Farcon dm my friend, let’s chat

Ive actually been thinking about that flow for EmpireBuilder, as we get 20% on tokens deployed through us, & the vision/goal is to symbiotically and generatively grow their ecosystem for all participants 🫡