RE: Steem post promotion: Past, present, and future
Maybe this is just semantics, but I think it's a mistake to call this "burning". It's really unclear to me if burning, in-and-of-itself, actually does anything good for a token. You could even make the case that someone burning a token is sending a signal to the world "This is worth $0". But the promoted post feature isn't necessarily doing that, it's you buying something from the blockchain, so the signal is "Having extra visibility is worth X SBD to me".
Yeah, the language is tricky. It's the same thing with "burning" on TRX. If I understand, that's actually transaction fees and something to do with USDD minting. So the account owners are actually paying for a service from the blockchain. On the other hand, in both cases, I guess the blockchain really is burning them.
If we wanted something similar, with a central agent buying tokens and disappearing them, a DAO-funded bot could do that
It's ironic that promoted post usage died out when the @burnpost experiment had so much curator support.
Technically, the SBD "disappear" from the system. Whether you want to call this "burning" or "booking out" is probably a matter of preference.
All transferred SBD are set back to 0 with the next block. In addition,
current_sbd_supplyis reduced by the amount andvirtual_supplyis reduced accordingly.In the current phase, this would be particularly important, as it would then reduce the debt ratio again.
However, for this to have a noticeable effect, quite a lot of SBD would have to be "burnt"...
If the price rises as a result, this has an additional positive effect on the debt ratio.