Thank you everyone again for all the thoughtful comments and for engaging with this proposal in such a constructive and forward-looking way. I wanted to take a moment to directly address some of the concerns raised by various contributors — we really appreciate the time and care behind them.
1. Fixed Supply vs. Low Inflation Anchor
“I am opposed to fixing the supply… I recommend fixing the inflation rate once it has been reduced to a certain level, such as 0.5%.” — @you425
This is a very fair concern. The proposed fixed supply is primarily designed from an investment thesis perspective — to bring long-term clarity for institutional alignment and prepare Astar for more strategic initiatives including some related to Soneium.
Importantly, under the proposal’s emission decay, ASTR issuance maintains 81% after year 1, and 65% after year 2. According to our model, emissions won’t reach 0.5% annualized levels until years, so we have ample buffer to observe the ecosystem’s evolution and make adjustments as needed.
2. dApp Staking “Phase-Out” or Sustainability Risk
“Fixing the supply would result in a gradual phase-out of dApp Staking, raising sustainability concerns.” — @you425
“The current dApp staking system is not functioning properly… Fix that before moving forward.” — @AstarPunks
This is a nuanced issue. dApp Staking was introduced over 5 years ago, and while it served a critical role during our early growth, the current developer environment and financial stack have changed dramatically.
The truth is, dApp Staking in its current form has limited appeal for today’s builders, especially compared to more tailored tools (points systems, LPs, milestone grants, Soneium promotion, etc.). I think it is not directly related to fixed supply discussions, and we should create a dedicated working group to improve dApp Staking — ideally toward simpler, goal-oriented, and governance-aware models in the later stage.
3. Sustainability of Core Infrastructure (AFC, Treasury, Coretime)
“There’s no guarantee that non-inflationary income can cover coretime or strategic needs.” — @you425
Thanks for surfacing this. Hope to clarify: ASTR inflation is not currently used as main source to pay for coretime or infrastructure costs. ASTR inflation is now mostly burned or directed to builders/stakers/collaters.
So while long-term sustainability remains important, the emission cap does not hinder core infrastructure funding, which is designed to evolve with AFC and future revenue sources.
4. Developer Incentives & “Builder-First” Vision
“Developers should be the first to be given preferential treatment.” — @AstarPunks
I agree with the principle — builders are at the heart of any thriving network.
In 2020, inflation-driven rewards made sense. Today, builders are incentivized by more nuanced and competitive stacks: points programs, reputation-based grants, exposure to real-world users (e.g. via Soneium), and yield/liquidity alignment.
Again, this reinforces why we should treat developer incentives as a separate topic, to be worked on jointly with the Main Council, Community Council, and AFC teams.
5. Governance Centralization Risk (e.g. Exchanges or LSDs)
“Voting rights via exchanges or LSDs could result in disproportionately large voting power.” — @you425
This is an important concern, but one that is orthogonal to whether we use inflation or not. Governance centralization should be tackled through mechanism design, and we’re exploring:
-
Custodial delegation restrictions
-
Active voter boosts
-
Transparent delegation metrics
Happy to open a dedicated governance safeguards thread to explore and co-design these ideas.
6. “What Is Astar’s USP in This New Paradigm?”
“What is the unique selling point (USP) of Astar, especially if ETH gas and stablecoins dominate?” — @priceylife
I appreciate this question — it’s fundamental.
To me, Astar’s unique positioning lies in becoming the staking, coordination, and governance hub of the Astar DAO Collective, which aims to deliver blockchain technologies for real-world adoption, not just a smart contract platform. The ASTR token powers this layer — with usage across:
-
Governance (via dApp Staking + proposal voting)
-
DeFi (as a routing asset & collateral)
-
Consumer applications (e.g., points, badges, rewards)
-
Gas token + AA integrations on Soneium
The supply cap brings credibility and predictability to this thesis — helping us decouple incentives from inflation and focus instead on non-inflationary value creation.
7. Cap Support but Caution on dApp Staking Sustainability
“I support a cap, but have questions about the impact on dApp Staking.” — @Beck
That’s very fair. The multi-year decay curve and AFC are precisely designed to ease the transition.
With ~10 years before hitting 0.5% emission levels, we have time to:
-
Pilot new funding mechanisms
-
Launch Astar-native dev opportunities
-
Incentivize governance participation
-
Refactor dApp Staking into a long-term aligned format
Thanks again for all the input — please feel free to share if further comments.