To quote @bernalgo from another thread:
It will only increase sell pressure. The rewards tokens will be sold and not reinvested elsewhere.
It will accomplish the exact opposite of what is intended.
So this is my question: Why on earth would we as a platform want to risk whale govs liquidating after VC’s dumping on us for months and rather horrible overall global-economical environment for assets overall, if we reduced everyone’s max lock to only 60 days? Some of those govs mind you, a pretty large amount, already are not exactly active on the platform, voting in farming rewards distribution, etc.
We want (far) more tiny locked for long-term holding and voting power for the health of the platform, not to reduce lockings to mere months that anyone can then dump at the slightest pump in only a few short weeks.
Liquidity should be derived from governance participation and rewards. The more Tiny govs lock tiny in tiny-paired liquidity, the better.
The BEST way to do both would be to allow tiny-sided LP’s to lock in the governance vault.
Which is a vote we already have ongoing vote for right here, however implementation would be pending resources being available:
Gotta say mate, this looks more like you want an unlock to empty your own bags rather than do anything for the benefit of Tinyman.
Because reducing the max lock to 60 days, means you’d be able to UNLOCK your tokens after 60 days.
As far as the 9M airdrop, pending an on-chain vote we already have an initiative in play for it’s use: