Thank you @Victor118 for initiating this thread.
Following a “try-now-revert-later” approach, wrt the recent prop#998, why not start rethinking “money and tokenomics” by reverting proposal 848?
Respectfully speaking, was it not a politically driven agenda to fund, in phases, wasm based liquid staking and increase adoption? Further treating ATOM as “money,” when it was designed for staking and governance RE tokenomics.
~Two years following, seems like the goal has been complete, upon dAtom’s being returned, versus the committed 50,000 ATOM.
Would like to add here, that staked ATOM not only earn yield by helping secure the network to maintain/reach the ~67%, but within this framework, it also serves as Validator’s personal CP and a means to gain voting rights, alongside a means to reach quorum, via Hub staker delegations.
With that said, A dual token model is fully supported. Curious, would combining forces with our complimentary system, AtomOne, to somehow utilize their designated fee token on the Cosmos Hub, be something worth trying for?