Hyper governance vote confirmation: Aid Fund HYPE Token has been destroyed, 85% rights support.

2025-12-24 04:32:09

Abstract generation in progress

[Bit推] Hyper ecosystem has made significant progress. According to official disclosure, the HYPE tokens in the aid fund system wallet address (0xfefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefefe) have been officially destroyed. This destruction was determined through on-chain governance voting - the consensus among holders is quite clear: 85% of the voting rights support the destruction plan, 7% oppose it, and 8% chose to abstain. The entire process is based on a stake-weighted mechanism, reflecting the characteristics of distributed decision-making. Such token burning initiatives typically have an impact on the project's inflation expectations and long-term tokenomics.

HYPE1,09%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AllTalkLongTrader

· 8h ago

85% of the votes were cast, and this governance proposal really has some substance. Burning HYPE is like "slimming down" the economic model, and when inflation pressure is at an all-time high, this move is quite a wise decision.

View OriginalReply0

BugBountyHunter

· 8h ago

Is destroying 85% support approved? Does this data really mean anything? Feels like it's always this high...

View OriginalReply0

CryptoTherapist

· 12-24 09:47

ngl, 85% approval rate screams either genuine consensus or people just couldn't be bothered to actually read the proposal. the real question—did this actually address the underlying tokenomics anxiety, or are we just doing performative burn theater again?

Reply0

Gusti11

· 12-24 06:25

Bull Run 🐂

Reply0

orphaned_block

· 12-24 04:58

85% support for the burn, this level of consensus is a bit outrageous, feels like it was decided long ago --- Another burn, inflation pressure can ease, but at this rate, the coin price still depends on subsequent ecological development --- Can the weighted voting system really represent the community's will? The large investors have the final say --- Not bad, at least there are no behind-the-scenes operations, on-chain voting is more transparent than traditional methods, as long as it’s not manipulated by whales --- This wave of burning operations is quite standard, it just depends on whether there will be real applications to follow up --- How to interpret the 7% opposition, I always feel like they see something we don't --- Tokenomics in the long term still relies on actual use for support, simply burning coins is just a temporary fix.

View OriginalReply0

Layer2Observer

· 12-24 04:53

The 85% support rate is quite interesting, and does the 8% abstention mean that there are still some Large Investors watching from the sidelines?

View OriginalReply0

GhostAddressHunter

· 12-24 04:48

An 85% voter turnout is so high? Thankfully, that 8% of abstaining brothers kept their cool.

View OriginalReply0

NotAFinancialAdvice

· 12-24 04:43

85% agree to the destruction, this consensus level is acceptable. Just don't know if this favourable information will be hyped later. --- Destruction is one thing, but the key still lies in how the ecosystem develops; just burning coins won't save the project. --- It's all about destruction and governance voting... the old routine, can we have something tangible? --- Wait, the aid fund is directly destroyed? Feels like something's missing; shouldn't there be a sequel? --- Those who vote for weight have agreed, so it's basically set in stone, that's the good thing about distributed decision-making. --- Ngl, this destruction effort is still a bit intense, the inflation expectations need to be recalculated. --- Anyway, I believe in this consensus, 85% can't be wrong. --- After the destruction, then what? The price has to go up to count, everyone. --- The design of the weighted voting mechanism is still acceptable; it's not the one-person-one-vote approach.

View OriginalReply0

fren.eth

· 12-24 04:41

85% support for the burn, this consensus is indeed strong But we still need to see if there is really Favourable Information afterwards, let's not have it be just a prelude to Be Played for Suckers Burning is one thing, the key is whether the ecosystem can get up and running.

View OriginalReply0

HalfBuddhaMoney

· 12-24 04:38

85% support for the burn, how strong must this consensus be, it really feels like the entire ecosystem has recognized it. --- Is the burn completed? Can we finally breathe a sigh of relief from inflation pressure? How do we see the trend moving forward? --- It's all about voting rights and decentralized decision-making, sounds pretty democratic, but I'm just afraid that in the end, it's still the large investors who call the shots. --- Tokenomics is going to be repriced again, is this wave favourable or unfavourable for the holders? --- 8% abstention is indeed a bit much, what are these people thinking? --- On-chain burning is becoming more and more common, can it really make a difference or is it just a numbers game? --- Hyper is making quite a few moves, I just hope they can hold on until the bull run. --- A support rate of 85% is indeed high, but if the price doesn't rise after the burn, I will just laugh.

View OriginalReply0