EGLD供应冲击：Multiversx Breaks承诺，火花争议

MultiverSX面临反弹，作为消除EGLD供应上限与多年诺言相冲突的提议，引起人们对通货膨胀和长期价值的担忧。

Hold on to your hats, folks, because the MultiversX community is buzzing. A recent proposal to ditch the hard cap on EGLD supply has ignited a firestorm, raising serious questions about broken promises and the future of the token. Is this a strategic pivot or a stumble?

伙计们，请抓住帽子，因为Multiversx社区正在嗡嗡作响。抛弃EGLD供应硬质帽子的最新提议引发了一场大火，引发了有关诺言的诺言和代币的未来的严重问题。这是战略枢纽还是绊倒？

The Broken Promise: EGLD's Supply Cap

损坏的承诺：EGLD的供应帽

For years, MultiversX (formerly Elrond) has touted a fixed supply of around 31.4 million EGLD, drawing parallels to Bitcoin's scarcity model. Their website even boldly states, "There can only ever be 30 million EGLD." But now, a proposal spearheaded by core developer Robert Sasu suggests introducing a 9.47% annual tail inflation rate. Ouch. This feels like a rug pull for those who bought into the scarcity narrative.

多年来，MultiverSX（以前是Elrond）吹捧了约3140万EGLD的固定供应，这与比特币的稀缺模型相似。他们的网站甚至大胆地指出：“只有3000万个EGLD。”但是现在，由核心开发商罗伯特·萨苏（Robert Sasu）率领的一项提案表明，每年的尾巴通货膨胀率为9.47％。哎哟。对于那些涉足稀缺叙事的人来说，这感觉就像是地毯。

Sasu himself, ironically, stated earlier this year, "Nobody is talking about increase in supply." Well, Robert, now everyone is talking about it.

具有讽刺意味的是，Sasu本人在今年早些时候表示：“没有人在谈论供应的增加。”好吧，罗伯特，现在每个人都在谈论它。

The Justification: Growth and Liquidity

理由：增长和流动性

The MultiversX Foundation argues that this shift is necessary for growth, attracting liquidity, and fostering a more sustainable ecosystem. The idea is to burn 10% of validator fees and direct 90% of fees to builders to incentivize innovation. The hope is that increased adoption will drive revenue, creating a virtuous cycle.

MultiverSX基金会认为，这种转变对于增长，吸引流动性并促进更可持续的生态系统是必要的。这个想法是要烧掉10％的验证者费用，并将90％的费用直接向建筑商激励创新。希望增加的采用将推动收入，从而创造出良性周期。

The Skepticism: Inflation Nation

怀疑主义：通货膨胀国家

However, not everyone's buying it. Critics like Justin Bons from CyberCapital argue that the proposed inflation rate is excessively high and the burn rate too low. The worry is that this will dilute the value of existing holdings and create selling pressure from validators and smart contract owners looking to cash in.

但是，并不是每个人都在购买它。诸如网络资本的贾斯汀·邦斯（Justin Bons）这样的批评家认为，拟议的通货膨胀率过高，燃烧率太低。担心的是，这将稀释现有持股的价值，并造成验证者和希望兑现的智能合同所有者的销售压力。

xMoney's Shadow

Xmoney的影子

This isn't the first time MultiversX has faced controversy. The xMoney project (also Foundation-owned) previously announced a token migration that effectively diluted holders. This history adds fuel to the fire, making the community even more wary.

这不是Multiversx首次面临争议。 Xmoney Project（也是基金会）以前宣布了有效稀释持有人的象征性移民。这段历史为大火增加了燃料，使社区更加警惕。

My Two Satoshis

我的两个satoshis

While I understand the need for projects to adapt and evolve, this move feels like a betrayal of trust. Transparency and clear communication are crucial in crypto, and breaking a core promise like this erodes confidence. I think MultiversX needs to do a better job of explaining the rationale behind this decision and addressing the legitimate concerns of its community. Otherwise, they risk alienating the very people who helped them get where they are today. Is this change really for the best, or just a way to kick the can down the road?

尽管我了解项目需要适应和发展，但此举感觉就像是对信任的背叛。透明度和清晰的沟通在加密货币中至关重要，打破这样的核心承诺会侵蚀信心。我认为MultiverSX需要做得更好，以解释这一决定背后的理由并解决其社区的合法问题。否则，他们冒着疏远帮助他们到达今天的地方的人的风险。这种变化真的是为了最好的，还是仅仅是将罐头踢向道路的一种方法？

The Bottom Line

底线

The EGLD supply cap debate is a reminder that nothing is set in stone in the crypto world. While MultiversX aims for growth, the path forward is fraught with challenges and skepticism. Whether this proposal will ultimately benefit or harm the project remains to be seen. One thing's for sure: it's gonna be a wild ride. Time to HODL on tight and see how this plays out! To the moon... or maybe just sideways for a while?

EGLD供应帽辩论提醒人们，在加密货币世界中没有任何东西。尽管MultiverSX的目标是增长，但前进的道路充满了挑战和怀疑。该提案最终将受益还是损害该项目还有待观察。可以肯定的是：这将是一个疯狂的旅程。是时候紧紧抓住了，看看这是如何发挥作用的！到月球...或者可能只是一段时间侧面？