Yes, I support this proposal.
I support this proposal.
Wtf. So, after a full three years, we’re finally getting our next token distribution.
I don’t fully agree with this proposal.
Early supporters who participated in the second presale, where they paid much more per token, should have slightly better vesting conditions. Shorter cliff or shorter linear vest.
Womp womp, where do you vote ? Sure to two more yeasts i guess
Ok. Hope it’s worth more by then.
Yes but too long 4years
Yes. Proceed and make this project a success.
Yes, I support this proposal.
So, yes of course i vote
Yes but 4years is too long thanks
Two years is long time i dont want to wait unlock my tokens and them if you want lock it forever
Yes, I support this proposal.
I support this 解鎖代幣方案
I think this proposal is fair and it show long term commitment by team and founders to lock up longer and the 10% burn is an immediate reward for those that held.
Yes, I support this proposal.
Yes, that’ a good job.
Dear WLFI Team and Community,
I appreciate the effort behind this governance proposal and the strong alignment signal it aims to send — especially the team’s willingness to accept a longer 5-year schedule (2-year cliff + 3-year linear vest) plus a 10% burn. That level of commitment from insiders is rare and worth acknowledging.
That said, as an early supporter with 80% of my WLFI allocation still locked (after already waiting ~550+ days), the current “2-year cliff + 2-year linear vest or remain locked indefinitely” structure feels overly punitive and risks further eroding holder confidence.
Many of us have been patient through the project’s early growth phase (USD1 expansion, partnerships, bank charter progress, etc.). A complete reset with another full 2-year blackout period before any tokens move does not adequately recognize that prior lock-up time or provide meaningful relief.
**I propose the following reasonable amendment for the early supporter tranche:**
- **Immediate release of 10%** of the locked allocation upon opt-in (this would give holders some liquidity and a tangible show of good faith right now).
- Then proceed with the **2-year cliff** on the remaining 90%, followed by a **2-year linear vest**.
This small upfront release would:
- Boost morale and demonstrate that the project values its earliest backers.
- Still enforce strong long-term alignment (the vast majority remains locked for 4+ years total from now).
- Reduce the “all-or-nothing” ultimatum feel that is generating significant backlash in the community.
- Keep the overall supply shock controlled while showing flexibility.
The team is already taking tougher terms with a burn — extending a modest gesture to early supporters who funded the vision at the start would make this proposal feel more balanced and community-friendly.
I’m still supportive of the long-term vision for WLFI and USD1, which is why I’m engaging constructively rather than rejecting the proposal outright. I believe this small change would significantly improve reception and participation in the opt-in.
我虽然同意这个提案，但请团队还是为早期支持者多想想，他们是这个项目最早和忠实的支持者！