Interlink Revolution retweetledi
This perfectly shows just how many people in the Pi community lack even the most basic understanding of token economics.
I just picked two of These comments.
"What a load of nonsense. The Core Team said they do not interfere with exchanges. Why don’t you just create your own coin and do whatever you want with it? Then I’m sure it’ll become a huge success!”
“Stop talking nonsense, you bastard. There are still so many people who haven’t received a single penny after seven years. Are you saying we should burn all of their efforts too? This short-sighted piece of trash must be the mother of some Korean bastard. Get lost.”
U know what normally, a community wants the foundation to burn tokens, while the foundation hesitates or pushes back. That is simply common sense.
Why? Because the foundation can continue selling its large token reserves in the future and generate revenue from them.
However, when excess, unused tokens are burned, future selling pressure can be reduced, the token’s scarcity can increase, and its value can be better protected. In other words, a token burn generally benefits the community.
But in the Pi community, the moment you mention a token burn, people come after you with every kind of insult imaginable.
The reason is simple: many of them do not even understand the basic concept of a token burn.
A token burn does not mean destroying the coins in your personal wallet. It also has nothing to do with exchanges.
A token burn usually means core team sending unused tokens that have not yet entered circulation—and were intended for future use—to an inaccessible wallet with no private key or recovery phrase, making them permanently unusable.
So a token burn would not directly harm ordinary holders. In fact, it could create several benefits for them.
The party that would actually have to make a sacrifice is not the community, but the Core Team.
Now look at the Pi price.
I think Pi really needs some solution .
#pi #pinetwork #파이 #파이코인
English
