Once again, I think it's very shortsighted to think that stopping development will fix all our problems. We're working on something that could both attract more users and generate revenue for us, hence reducing our impact on the DHF in the long run. We're already 90% there and starting internal testing. Is it the right moment to shut us down? Did you actually read the proposal?
If keychain goes to maintenance mode, it can be done for nearly free, Stoodkev himself said this publicly
That's not what I've said. I said we'll keep it running as long as possible because it's critical to Hive. I also mentioned we have incompressible costs.
Your reply is upvoted by @topcomment; a manual curation service that rewards meaningful and engaging comments.
If we have no money, then we have no vision or sight :)
That's all that I am saying. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
So, in fact we are in agreement!
I have read the proposal 5 times. Where in this proposal we talk about hive treasury? In other words, that would be the inflation which gets the money in the treasury.
We mention that although we'll start with DHF only (with a substantial payroll reduction of 24% already), one of our major focuses will be to generate revenue through swaps once our multichain wallet is in production and use that revenue to reduce the load on the DHF. EVM chains have much more liquidity and swap / bridge / ramps providers so it would be much easier for us to generate revenue at that point, and we're getting close... Of course, that wouldn't be enough to self-sustain from the get-go, but we could slowly reduce our impact on inflation through a burn mechanism.
Anyway, I know there's no convincing you, just laying it all down in case it wasn't clear enough in the proposal post.
That explains how your project is planning for revenue and potential earnings in future. That has nothing to do with current situation of Hive treasury. Deflection is never a good strategy Stoodkev, with each argument you are loosing credibility with me.