The Atom 2.0 proposal has been rejected and vetoed by the validator and the community, on the grounds that the proposed number of coins is planned to be added/inflated. This proposal is almost similar to the incident that happened to LUNA coin until the total supply became 6,900,000,000 LUNA/LUNA 2.0. I think it is a function of a Vote from the community to decide the good policy to do. The effect of this resistance gives negative sentiment for ATOM prices but not negative news, in my opinion.
The ATOM 2.0 proposal was rejected on November 14, with more than 33.4% of the votes cast without a Veto (right to overturn/withdraw judgment 37.39 percent).
The ATOM2.0 Whitepaper was finally released at the end of September, but the update caused a public debate.
- The Whitepaper states that more ATOM tokens will be minted for use in the Community Pool, but community members are concerned that this will negatively affect the price of ATOM tokens;
- Community members suggest that liquidity guarantees should have collateral limits to reduce the systemic risk of theft from the collateral pool;
- The new White Paper should unite society, not divide it.
The proposal maintains modifications in the new Whitepaper, such as allowing other chains to use the Hub to protect the network and reducing the number of new atoms produced each month from exponential to constant after a 36-month transition period.
As previously reported, Jae Kwon, co-founder of Cosmos, objected to the portion of the ATOM 2.0 proposal that provided a liquidity commitment for ATOM, pointing out that the existing ATOM 2.0 proposal also had problems mining large amounts of tokens to insiders. Treasury controlled.
Check out our new platform 👉 https://thecapital.io/
This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. CryptosOnline.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, business or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any loss or damage caused or alleged to be caused by, or in connection with, the use of or reliance on any content, goods, services or opinions mentioned in this article.
#Bitcoin #Crypto #Cryptocurrency