#dusk $DUSK @Dusk I assumed higher DUSK usage should automatically mean higher DUSK burn.
Then I checked the current tokenomics documentation, and the mechanism is more interesting.
Transaction fees are paid in DUSK and become part of the block reward. But the burn is tied to the generator’s conditional extra 10% reward: the generator receives 70% plus up to another 10%, depending on credits included in the block certificate. Any undistributed part of that extra 10% is burned.
That distinction matters.
A busy block with high gas usage can still produce little or no burn if the generator earns its full bonus. So “more transactions = more burn” is not a valid conclusion by itself.
What I would track next is simple: fees per block → generator bonus earned → bonus burned → net DUSK issuance.
The real question is whether burn persists when activity rises.
That is the metric I want to watch for $DUSK
What drives DUSK burn most?
Then I checked the current tokenomics documentation, and the mechanism is more interesting.
Transaction fees are paid in DUSK and become part of the block reward. But the burn is tied to the generator’s conditional extra 10% reward: the generator receives 70% plus up to another 10%, depending on credits included in the block certificate. Any undistributed part of that extra 10% is burned.
That distinction matters.
A busy block with high gas usage can still produce little or no burn if the generator earns its full bonus. So “more transactions = more burn” is not a valid conclusion by itself.
What I would track next is simple: fees per block → generator bonus earned → bonus burned → net DUSK issuance.
The real question is whether burn persists when activity rises.
That is the metric I want to watch for $DUSK
What drives DUSK burn most?
A) Higher network usage
0%
B) Generator bonus not earned
0%
C) Both mechanisms
0%
D) Not enough data yet
0%
0 votes • Voting closed