Justin Bons

I agree with @Justin_Bons here SUI indeed has great tech and terrible tokenomics I have talked about that in the past and have both used and supported the Sui Network for a brief period, but I believe SUI's problem goes beyond tokenomics at this point I'm talking about the freeze & seize precedent What the SUI Foundation did, and how it behaved, following the CETUS hack has established a dangerous precedent for the network It was able to freeze and seize funds from an account they did not have the respective private keys to, breaking the entire cryptographic security premise of the network It prooved that SUI validators can and will (very promptly) collude to freeze and seize $SUI from accounts they don't believe should have them This is already a big issue for smart contracts alone (e.g., USDT/C) or L2s (e.g., Arbitrum), but it is a bigger issue when it happens at the L1 infrastructure level and with the native token that powers its decentralization and security They created the precedent for an action that now can (and likely will) be used again for different reasons -- all strongly rushed, pushed by a narrative full of misrepresentation, strawmen, and gaslight I participated in one debate on that and experienced it myself -- it was impossible to hold an honest conversation and expose my counterarguments, to the point I gave up trying Based on my experience, I don't think Mysten Labs would ever acknowledge the problems Justin raised here and I don't see SUI working to fix them, as they seem intentional and by design To be fair, I do think SUI ecosystem has fantastic human beings and very capable tech-wise, but there is too much conflicting interests and governance influence for us to see a positive change soon enough -- I hope to be proven wrong on this one I agree SUI is a project worth saving I'm just pessimistic that it will be possible in the next few years Maybe one day...

🚨 @SuiNetwork is Centralised > 52% of 10B supply "unallocated" till 2030. > Founders control that supply. > They stake it. They earn the rewards. > 84% of all staked $SUI belongs to them. > They claim it's parked with centralized custodians (BitGo, Anchorage...) > Refused to disclose the wallets. This supply was probably kept unallocated for ecosystem growth and community incentives. Not for the team to treat like secret reserve. Sui has great tech. The community is genuinely stronger than most chains. But this is not decentralization. Thoughts 👇

@0xPain__ Do you understand that the founders controlling over 80% of the supply; Means they can censor & double spend transactions That is what makes it centralized, along with the investment risk Which is nothing like SOL BTW who's foundation was only allocated 15% of supply initially

I think @Justin_Bons hasn’t actually used any protocols on Sui, and doesn’t fully understand how Sui tokenomics works, which is why he labels it as “centralized.” The key point is that 50% of the SUI supply is allocated to the Community Reserve, and it is meant to serve the ecosystem. Protocols on Sui don’t need to fund incentives out of pocket. The @SuiFoundation supports the ecosystem broadly. And a large portion of rewards comes from staking emissions, which creates a more consistent and sustainable reward system over time. This is not very different from @solana . Solana does not have a fixed supply and runs with inflation of around 8% annually to support its ecosystem. Sui simply takes a more structured and arguably more stable approach. That’s one of the reasons why Sui has been able to maintain a relatively stable DeFi ecosystem over time. Instead of calling Sui tokenomics centralized, I would argue it is one of the better-designed tokenomic models I’ve seen.

More brilliant work @Justin_Bons and extremely disappointed in transparency from @SuiNetwork @EmanAbio stating they are decentralized when they are not I love SUI the protocol which had been making a real contribution to the future of Crypto Sad

That is a fair framing, if we are honest with ourselves HYPE is arguably even more centralized, in different ways SOL seems to occupy a sweetspot between performance & decentralization Anything overtaking SOL would have to do better on both fronts, which does not exist yet! The closest we get to it is SOL's future design, as seen through Alpenglow & MCL! Unless HYPE decentralizes more before that happens, which is the multi trillion Dollar question

@Justin_Bons One year ago, the main competitor for Solana was SUI, but this centralized blockchain defined FAILED to deliver what it wanted… Nowadays the real competitor and in many ways the winner seems to be HYPE…

1/16) SUI has a great design, except for its token economics: SUI claims to have a capped supply of 10B, with 52% being "unallocated" till 2030 The problem is that over 7B SUI is being staked right now! Over 84% of the staked supply is held by founders! SUI is centralized: 🧵

We know for certain it is less than 12.5% of the supply, as that was the foundation's initial allocation Estimates based on known spending would put that at around 5% of SOL's total supply today Nowhere near SUI's 84%... It is disengenous drawing an equivalence between them Subverting consensus requires at least 33% of the staked supply; the Solana Foundation is nowhere near that figure, while SUI goes way over it!

@Justin_Bons now ask to solana fndn how much they control and how much they sold this year

@RaoulGMI - what’s your take? Can you use your influence to get the project to make the right decision here and burn the unallocated supply?

True! Standards have gone seriously downhill over years People used to criticize ETH for their non-public allocation Which amounts to less than 10% of the total supply today! One good thing about VC's is that they do eventually sell, naturally distributing the supply over time After the VC's dump on retail, of ofcourse, as they acquired their tokens at pre-sale prices. That is a very dirty game, one that I am glad I have nothing to do with Generally speaking, the older the token, the better distributed, the supply is both due to time & better standards when they were founded

@Justin_Bons This is one big reason that older projects are "blue chip" now: today, almost nothing new has a decentralized supply.

@niranthm It has some of the best tech in crypto & is among the most scalable & fast It is more centralized, though If they figure out how to increase validator count without impacting latency too much, that would be a game-changer! Technically, it is great; economically, it is terrible

@Justin_Bons is sui worth saving?

16/16) The truth is that SUI's supply distribution makes SOL look like a saint & ETH a heavenly angel We can be conflicted about this story There is a redemption path SUI can still walk down All it would take is surrendering control of the "unallocated" supply; BURN IT NOW! 🔥

15/16) That is what makes the SUI's supply distribution so tragic As the tech behind SUI is fantastic! Things are rarely black & white in crypto; nothing is all good or all bad SUI is a permissionless & public blockchain with a predatory supply distribution, good & evil in one