you never just say “yes”, right? 
1 Like
Matt thinks of every single detail
2 Likes
A very admirable trait, and I love it - just thought we discussed this 6345788421 times on discord so we can all just say “yes” 
2 Likes
Twenty characters minimum.
Yes.
3 Likes
I have a weird idea to throw out there, more of a hypothetical than anything. Its probably not possible to implement. It would be interesting if instead of rebases, there was a reflection mechanic that took say, 10% of each sale (and/or buy) and reflected that value to holders in some way. Whether it be the revenue share, or into extra memo which users could turn into wmemo. You wouldn’t want the value reflected directly into wmemo as exchanges don’t like a token with a constantly changing supply. I would much rather have this type of mechanic than a rebase one. Just food for thought <3
2 Likes
Imo buy and sell taxes on tokens are kind of cringe, I think it would just irritate holders.
But seeing as most tokens that have this feature are usually just meme coins with no backing or anything it could be different with us however I still would not be in favour of something like that.
Also retroactively adding such a mechanic to token wouldn’t be possible i think.
3 Likes
The initial thread which started this chain is the only thread this comment is responding to.
Your disdain for rebasing is based on a misunderstanding of economic theory. I apologize if I am wrong and it’s just “cancel culture” manifested in defi. Regardless, it’s based on a misguided interpretation of “stock splits”.
(TLDR last paragraph)
To fanatic anti-centralized neo capitalists fueling hypercapitalism as the only solution, the rebase is everything. The anti-rebase crowd, the whales, who are just as vulnerable to famine as they are feast (Do Kwon), astutely recognize the risk of dancing with the masses and succumbing to the fickle mood swings of the herd. If this is you, I tip my hat. If this is not you, then I say you have no place being an anti-rebase extremist. It’s counterproductive.
The long term compound can occur in one of only two ways: You either continually increase your free cash flow logarithmically by preventing an accumulation of surplus, or, in the face of inefficient use of capital and an artificially reduced ROI due to mismanagement (see SPELL, TIME, Yearn, Beefy, SIFU, etc…), the alternative, and sadly, the only efficient use of capital in the spirit of free market hypercapitalism, is splitting/rebasing and buying back/burning.
In stocks, as in tokens, or pig farming, it’s all about increasing quantity. Wealth is through accumulation. Sure pork prices go down with surging supply, but that’s the beauty of scale. A pig farmer hits that sweet spot where h is herd not only offsets the annual culling but does so exponentially. Once the price decrease is neutralized by supply growth, the law of exponential expansion takes over (aka compounding, 8th wonder of the universe, etc…)
Is it that you’ve accumulated so much wealth that the idea of accumulating more repulses you? From the text I read which you authored, I know this is not the case. You might want to think that people could think that about you, but deep down, it smells like ass.
Jeff Bezos, ranked whatever on the top 5 list of world’s richest persons, even split Amazon 20 for 1. He must be an idiot that wants to make his stock look appealing to the masses rather than just the global elite. Perhaps having AMZN stock in a wider base reduces the risk of a 51/50 attack?
Warren Buffet on the other hand, used to openly admit his disdain for main street and when forced to issue a share at a lower price point in order to fend off a primitive version of a “vampire attack” in the late 20th century, he launched B share, loosely based on a ratio of 10:1 B to A shares.
Buffet was quoted the other day saying “it would be more efficient to give every child below the age of ten ON THE PLANET $1000 in cash when I die than deciding how to give another $50B to Bill Gates post 2021, who btw spends more on consultants in a year than I spent on coca cola in my lifetime, and the audacity to bill the foundation? Doesn’t he get the point I’m trying to make living in the same fucking house I bought 60 years ago?”
Digression. for TLDR, see last paragraph
Sure, lets’ allow our “token” to appreciate without issuing a single new token, and go the way of berkshire shares. Sure, we wouldn’t have more tokens, but each one of our tokens will cost 1500 BTC in 40 years, with BTC trading at $500,000. That’s a fuck ton of money right? The problem here is Buffet never intended to become an inefficient deployer of “new capital” while brilliantly deployed previous capital sweeps this problem under the rug by flooding the coffers with rising cash flow. Where’s WL’s cash flow?
[ …Crickets… ]
There comes a time when there is too much capital held by a single whale, who must convince those in the seats of power that he will never go off script and begin devouring everything in sight. Because there is a point mathematically where this event horizon exists, and Buffet passed it long ago, and knows it. We have not yet seen the era of “5150” attacks, but mark my words, we shall experience this in our lifetimes.
What I mean is, “what is wrong with splits”?
Apple has split 5 times since going public: 4:1, 7:1, 2:1, 2:1, 2:1.
1 shares = 224 split shares.
IBM has split 15 times AND issued 26 dividends of shares. That’s what we need.
Stop the burn. Instead, distribute wMEMO to existing holders. Is this not experimental capitalism? Let’s experiment. And be one of the first… we love the attention, plus need some right now.
In the end, it’s all about increasing wealth, who cares how as long as net worth is going in the right direction.
I hear you saying it, “so wtf does this have to do with rebases and fk all? Get to the TLDR”
See below for TLDR:
You are correct in that:
rebase == token split
the following points are ALL FALSE when applied to a VC DAO:
token split == gimik
token split =! positive economic value
splits == destruction of token economics
On the contrary, they are the key mechanism behind expansion at scale. (I’ll leave this for later)
When a centralized company “moons” (i.e. pucks, explodes, goes parabolic), the surge in stock price is a combination of some beta plus any alpha that may exist. The higher the beta, the easier it is to look brilliant, but when beta turns negative, the nasty starts flapping for oxygen as the tide recedes (see Do Kwon and others). Because it (thankfully) takes the attention away from the foul odor of puke on the walls from those looking at the TRUE performance of the WL treasury operations. And this is not an attack on the treasurer, whoever it is. When WL token price was surging, the only accurate valuation involves discounting performance for beta. When you do, then the residual you have left over is Alpha. In this very accurate mathematical construct, Skyhopper has actually delivered BETTER performance than the glory days of WL because the crypto-economy is in a deep freeze and undergoing an existential stress test. Factor out BETA and SKY is on frikin fire!
By turning off the rebase, you are naively suggesting “focus instead on cash flow generated by brilliant investments made via our hyper efficient treasury operations.”
Some advice from a market operator that truly lives this from eyes open to eyes shut: Generate the cash flow first, then ask the investment community to focus on it. Until then, stop the burn, distribute wMEMO as dividends and rebase rebase rebase …
3 Likes
I fully support this proposal, getting rid of rebase will stop this misunderstanding that rebases are profit mindset and also no more rebase PTSD.
2 Likes
Right a lot to break down in the sesquipedalian statement - I will keep my response simple though.
You state that our distain for rebases is from one of misunderstanding, this is just simply not true.
-
Everyone who is staking time, to memo every 8 hrs they get more memo, since everyone is getting the same memo it is identical to a stock split therefore has no additional value added.
-
We move away from Time a inflationary token to wMEMO a LONG time ago, rebases never change the amount of wMEMO a holder has confirming they do not get anything extra.
No matter how much Memo Rebases it will not increase my wealth - no matter how long someone stakes it will NEVER change the quantity of wMEMO they hold
Have to remind you that wMEMO is our primary token now, no one should be buying into wonderland via TIME due to the terrible liquidity.
This proposal has nothing to-do with cash flow.
If you call a 50mm loss this qtr on fire then sure go ahead.
Turning off the rebase will have no effect on cashflow and capital deployment of treasury operations this is a matter for the treasury manager.
And finally to touch on the idea of distributing the wMEMO in treasury this would have no effect on people holdings, market would correct for price, and the backing of tokens would decrease. it would be better to sell these tokens for the backing price or higher. These tokens are out of circulation so already considered “burned” every wMEMO out of circulation is better for holders
Calling yourself a market operator is funny too using big words too, seeing as previous posts you refer to yourself as a Degen, and lack some critical/logical thinking
Thank you for your insight so called Mr Market Operator.
3 Likes
Agreed. If they stop I stop also and will sell off my wMEMO because then this project is truly dead.
2 Likes
Can you please explain why?
Rebases have ZERO effect on your wMEMO
2 Likes
Well, for starters I am not convinced that is the case and since there is no harm in letting it run per your logic, I think I want them to continue and find out for myself. Rebases are what attracted the majority of holders in the first place along with Dani’s vision and the way it was back in december they worked nicely. It is a bit much to explain here, but I will post a new general topic on it, which might explain my position a bit better.
2 Likes
*rebases misled a majority of investors.
2 Likes
Yeah, time to rip off the band aid , wonderland 2.0 is here
2 Likes
I mean I like the idea of even just being able to hit a pause button on it at this point if we want
1 Like
so you want to remove something good
just because the majority of people
don’t have a brain to understand the concept of rebases
and how to weigh their investments and losses?
this is like protecting the world from doing stupid things.
stupid people do stupid things.
the best form of education is hurt/pain/loss. why?
because you learn to re-evaluate how you got there
and how to not get there again otherwise…
(if I have to add/ finish the “…” then you are one of those I was just writing about)
Idk how you could possibly perceive is as “good”.
assuming you didn’t fall for the big apy advertisement and you know how a rebase functions, how do you perceive the idea of a rebase as negative? genuinely curious to see what your thoughts are on the idea beyond how it potentially looks and effects other people. what is the economic factor that is so detriment?
Its pointless, and confuses the less intelligent people of the community.
So we make fundamental decisions for the protocol catering to them? I think it would serve everyone better to just not create over complicated points of contention.