2026-01-15 09:33:00

A new project has launched an interesting token issuance mechanism centered around community consensus.

The highlight of the project is this interconnected deflationary mechanism — 3% slippage from each transaction automatically enters the buyback and burn process. When the accumulated buyback and burn wallet balance reaches 0.01BNB, the system triggers an automated market maker mode. What's clever about this mode is: it automatically supports the price and burns tokens when the price drops, and when the price rebounds and rises, it continues to push the price up while synchronously burning tokens. In other words, regardless of market trends, it can achieve a continuous deflationary effect.

This design transforms traditional manual management into automated execution, reducing human intervention and making the burn logic more transparent and reliable. For investors interested in tokenomics, this mechanism is definitely worth observing for its actual effects.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

StealthDeployer

· 2h ago

It sounds like another automatic destruction scheme. Can this kind of thing really run to the end? 3% slippage to support the price... Basically, it's just cutting retail investors, as long as the data looks good, right? The deflationary mechanism sounds good in theory, but in practice, it's all a trap.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrying

· 6h ago

Another promise of automatic destruction, let's see how long it can last --- 3% slippage sounds significant, but how much will actually be received? --- Automatic market stabilization sounds great, but I'm afraid it's just another scheme to cut the retail investors' gains --- A deflationary mechanism is perfect, but without real application scenarios, it's still useless --- Only triggered once at 0.01BNB? This cycle is too long --- The mechanism design is good, but whether the operators have any tricks up their sleeves is the key --- Another "decentralized" automatic execution, but it still depends on the conscience of the contract creator --- Feels like everywhere is doing destruction; these days, it's embarrassing not to burn tokens before launching --- Automatic market makers sound like tools optimized for whales, but something still feels off

View OriginalReply0

MoonBoi42

· 12h ago

3% slippage auto-destruction, this trick sounds pretty good, but I'm just worried it's another PPT project fooling people Speaking of this automatic support logic, can it really work or is it just another round of harvesting? Waiting to see the real trading data; all the fancy words on paper are useless

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentPhilosopher

· 12h ago

Automatic burn and market stabilization, sounds great but depends on whether it can hold up in practice --- This mechanism design is pretty good, just worried it might be just a paper gimmick --- Automated execution sounds cool, but the real test is whether it works during a market crash --- 3% slippage for burns... why does this number feel so familiar, like I've seen it somewhere before --- The deflationary effect sounds attractive, but I care more about how much can actually be burned --- Community-driven, automatic stabilization... these buzzwords have been getting old over the past two years --- I'm curious to see how the 0.01BNB threshold is set, whether it might be too easy to trigger --- How decentralized is it? Don't want automation to end up with the project team calling all the shots

View OriginalReply0

OnchainHolmes

· 12h ago

3% slippage auto-burn? I've seen this trick too many times. The key is how long the team can stick around. How about we take a gamble? Will this project explode in popularity or go to zero in half a year? It sounds clever but also very risky. That automatic market stabilization mechanism could become a tool for cutting the grass if not controlled properly. Compared to hype economics, I more want to know if the liquidity is truly sufficient. Why does it feel like every new project wants to play with deflation tricks? I almost couldn't hold back my laughter. Wait, 0.01BNB triggers market making? Are you sure the mechanism is written correctly? This idea is indeed fresh, but the question is who will ensure that the burn logic is truly transparent? On-chain data speaks for itself. I don't trust just the white paper.

View OriginalReply0

TopBuyerBottomSeller

· 12h ago

Another story of "automatic destruction," does it all sound the same... This logic seems a bit questionable to me, only triggered at 0.01 BNB? How long does the transaction need to last? Automatic market stabilization and price pumping? It feels like they've just coded the market maker's job into the system. Wait, isn't this still dependent on human manipulation, just under a different guise? Let's wait until it officially launches and see. Don't be fooled by these flashy mechanisms.

View OriginalReply0

GasWaster

· 13h ago

It's the same old story of automatic burning and deflationary effects; I'm getting calluses on my ears from hearing it. It seems well-designed, but I'm just worried it will end up being a pretext for cutting the leeks again. Can a 3% slippage protect the market? First, see if the founders run away or not before blowing the horn.

View OriginalReply0