$SOL With this Double Disinflation proposal passing, after watching the entire voting process, I feel the community has not actually reached a consensus between inflation and burning. Reducing issuance is of course good for holders, but the fee-burning measure did not pass, which shows that people are still worried about network incentives and validator income. My personal judgment is that in the short term, the market will use the reduced supply as a narrative, and sentiment may be somewhat bullish, but in the long run, if the burn mechanism is hard to implement, SOL’s actual circulating supply will not shrink as quickly as expected. The narrow margin in this governance vote also shows that the disagreements within the network are not small. I would not treat this event as a one-sided positive catalyst; instead, I would watch validators’ behavior and on-chain fee changes next. After all, the supply-side story only matters when demand rises at the same time. The current focus for SOL should shift from simple inflation numbers to the network’s real usage rate. In this proposal, the failure of fee burning means network revenue does not directly translate into deflationary pressure, which to some extent weakens the appeal of the supply-side narrative. So my core view is: the expectation of reduced supply exists, but realizing it will require support from network activity; otherwise, with only a lower inflation rate, SOL will find it hard to stage an independent rally.