Is it possible to vote even if you’ve locked up your sSPELL in the abracadabra cauldron for leverage
Burn it, burn it all.
2 Likes
BURN IT ALL 
Merry Christmas 
1 Like
Totally Agree with this.
Will it be a single day event or burnt over a period of time?
Yes please. I feel diluted.
Will the burn happen instantly or over a period of time? Do hope devs have consideration to prevent front running and selling of news dumps! Support the proposal nonetheless!
Great idea. Agree, let’s do It!
We didn’t start the fire
Oh hang on!!! But we should!! YES!!! WE TOTALLY SHOULD!!!
WE DID START THE FIRE!!!
Burn it… 
I agree, let’s do it!
I also agree, an excellent proposal!
I too support the idea… let it burn…
I support the burn as well
Looks like I can’t vote given the leverage I have in the cauldron (all my sSpell is locked up in the smart contract.) But I fully support the burn!
I understand that emissions are probably larger than they need to be to maintain liquidity, but I still do not think this is a wise proposal. The only benefits that can accrue to abracadabra by burning these Spell is to 1) send a message and 2) lower the float, potentially improving performance statistics and lowering the fully-diluted valuation.
From a business point of view, burning these spell is foolish. This is because burns cannot be reversed. Perhaps the team will find a use for these spell in the future, perhaps they will not. If they do not, they can always be burned later. There is no reason to be hasty when you are about to embark on something irreversible.
I agree that “spell burns x…” will probably be perceived as positive news for short term traders, but for anyone who thinks long term, it seems quite silly. Yes one might think that this burning would increase the value of Spell via deflation, but time and time again, “buyback and burn” deflationary protocols have lost out to those that incentivize long-term holders through single sided staking, rebases whatever. I think most people will agree with me that this tiny disinflation will not by itself lead to higher spell prices. So what is the point of destroying these spell?
If the idea is to lower spell emissions, then lower them! The Spell could be held by the team for posterity indefinitely and that would just as effectively reduce the circulating supply and preclude farmers from dumping these marginal spell tokens. The only reason to go the extra step and send the Spell to the burn address would be to send a message… but what kind of message would it send?
I think it would send the message
“Spell governance chooses to circumscribe its future freedom of action for no tangible benefit.”
If someone can make a compelling case that there is a tangible benefit which could only be accomplished by burning spell, rather than sequestering it in the team’s wallet, I will respectfully yield.
1 Like
in the future, if there are more needs to use Spell, would it be possible for there to be a proposal to buyback and use that Spell for that specific purpose? or buy and burn is a fixed? you don’t need more tokens to do the new uses. Can we buy back and redirect to that new use when that time comes? this will show commitment to supporting the token price I believe.
A big bucket of worthless tokens is still worthless. Reduce the amount, and we can still do all the innovations with a smaller supply of high value tokens. Would YFI be a good case in point reference?
I concur with the burn proposal.
Burn it please. There are too much
This wont pump the price, but it will protect us from future dilution to some extent.
The price will pump when the protocol begins buying back more spell than it burns each week.
2 Likes