Is anyone from the team reading these posts or is it also a case of no price or tokenomics related discussion here as well as Discord?
We had a new tokenomics person join recently and he and other members of the team are still working on tokenomics proposals like this one and the fees changes. Also, the best way to get more visibility for a proposal is to make a FLIP about it because it is very easy for forum posts like this to get lost in the shuffle. If there is a FLIP, it is much easier to track and find.
Disclaimer: I am on the Flow team, but Iām not involved in any of the tokenomics discussions, so these are my personal observations and opinions
Some have been commenting about FLOW transaction fees being burned. This is already the case. Transaction fees are used to pay rewards, so the total amount of FLOW minted every week for rewards is decreased by the amount of fees for that week, which is effectively burning them. That number every week is not very high because tx fees are still so low, but there is also going to be a proposal soon to increase transaction fees and deal with inflation so that this makes more of a difference. Stay tuned for that.
Again, just my personal opinion, but this change (burning all staking rewards that Flow-operated nodes have ever received) is extremely drastic, so it is hard to take very seriously when the proposal is only a single paragraph that basically just says that inflation is a problem and we need to reduce the supply. I donāt mean that it is necessarily a bad idea, it might be the exact right thing to do! But when making a proposal this drastic, it needs a lot more research and justification to back it up (including citing sources and similar situations) for it to be seriously considered by the community.
I hope that helps explain! Sorry for the lack of responses. I hope this can be made into a real researched FLIP so we can get some real discussion started on it. Thanks for your suggestions and contributions! 
1 Like
Thanks for taking the time to reply @flowjosh
Feeās arenāt burnt, they are used to offset the staking rewards printed each epoch.
The protocol could be changed to be similar to Ethereum where the fees are actually burnt.
This way if the protocol becomes profitable then the token will become deflationary.
This could be tracked an updated on a dashboard so itās easier to see how close or far away that point is.
The proposal is similarly drastic as the 1000x storage fees proposal, but this only affects Dapper as opposed to every single non Dapper wallet user as per that proposal.
I am personally against Dapper tokens burned.
I mean for a long time they sponsored all chain, provided security even from times when we were not decentralized, made all the development of node software, maintained a lot of active nodes / sponsored a lot of projects, made a lot of good PR ( even sometimes I criticize being too much), distributed a lot of grants.
And they are still doing all those things.
Also even though they want, they cannot burn any legally probably ( old gained rewards )
@j00lz Correct, Fees arenāt directly burnt, but the fees every epoch are used to pay rewards instead of minting tokens, so the final state is effectively the same as just burning the fees first because in both situations, the total supply of tokens is the same at the end. no need to mint new tokens if weāre just going to immediately burn some in the same transaction.
I agree that this is similarly drastic as the storage fees proposal, but that proposal includes a FLIP and has examples and research shown to back it up. If yāall are serious about this proposal, please make a FLIP with some numbers and research to back up your claims, and youāll likely attract more discussion.