Solana’s New Inflation Plan: Could It Change Everything? Or Is It Just Another Mess?

by
  • Galaxy has submitted a new inflation proposal for Solana. Oh, joy. More inflation talk.
  • The proposal, like SIMD-228, has sparked *interesting* reactions from the usual crowd.

After stakeholders *politely* rejected Solana’s [SOL] 80% inflation cut proposal (thanks, SIMD-228) back in March, Galaxy has graciously floated yet another attempt. This time, they’re pitching a new “market-based” approach to set SOL’s future inflation. Because, clearly, we need more options in the world of crypto confusion.

“We just introduced a new Solana proposal called Multiple Election Stake-Weight Aggregation (MESA) to reduce SOL inflation: a more market-based approach to agreeing on the rate of future SOL emissions.”

Well, isn’t that nice? The new plan would allow validators (those mystical node operators who stake SOL to keep the whole thing running) to vote multiple times (because who doesn’t love a good vote?) and settle on the median result. Yes, that’s right. We’re trusting a bunch of random votes to figure out how much inflation is too much. This could be fun. Or not.

The resulting deflation rate, based on the median vote outcome, would then be… adopted. Because that’s always how it works in the magical world of blockchain governance. Right?

SOL Inflation Drama: Round 2

But wait – there’s more! This proposal is different from SIMD-228 in a few *slightly* significant ways. First, SIMD-228 was a one-time vote. You know, one-and-done. Simple. But Galaxy’s approach? Oh, it’s just several votes, because who needs clarity when you can have ambiguity?

Secondly, SIMD-228 was dynamic, reacting to staking demand, while Galaxy’s MESA prefers a *fixed* deflationary curve. Because why not just stick to something rigid and predictable, like an outdated GPS system that tells you to turn left when there’s no left turn?

Enter Tushair Jain, co-founder of MultiCoin Capital (and, apparently, not a fan of this new plan), who highlighted some serious flaws with the approach.

“It increases the governance burden on stakers who might not want to incur this cognitive load of deciding what inflation rate to vote for every epoch. A one-time vote is much easier for most stakers to participate in.”

Oh, but wait – there’s more! Some have even suggested that this approach could create uncertainty. Imagine that! Uncertainty in the world of cryptocurrency. Who would’ve thought?

But not everyone’s a skeptic. Anatoly Yakavenko, for example, termed the proposal “cool.” Yes, cool. Just cool. He even threw in the suggestion that it should be median-stake weighted. Because why not? More ways to tweak things, right?

Meanwhile, Solana is still looking for a long-term inflation rate of 1.5%, while it currently hovers at 5% per year (because that seems manageable, right?). They’re aiming to achieve this through a fixed 15% annual disinflationary curve, which sounds great if you like numbers that don’t exactly inspire confidence.

Critics argue that high inflation is like an all-you-can-eat buffet for SOL’s supply, devaluing it in the process. But despite the rejection of SIMD-228 last month, finding a solution to the inflation issue remains a bit like hunting for treasure in the Bermuda Triangle. Good luck with that.

So, will this new proposal ever gain traction among the key players? Who knows. But one thing’s for sure – as whale positions increase, we might see SOL head towards $150. If whales decide to get a little more involved, that is. I mean, who wouldn’t want to be a whale in this circus?

Read More

2025-04-18 15:09