13 Likes
its logical however in equity of the 30% bonus fee is finest concept but when equally distribute its will higher and trustable concept .
5 Likes
Arduous disagree.
How would this be truthful to individuals who didn’t purchase the tokens within the pre-sale at $0.05 and have to purchase at pre-market for $0.15 – $0.20? It is a capitalist market!
5 Likes
Admire your perspective — however I’d like to supply a counterpoint with some context.
Key Difference: Knowledge of Tradability
People buying WLFI at $0.15–$0.20 today already know that WLFI is becoming tradable soon.
They’re entering with:
- Clear confirmation that tokens will be liquid
- Knowledge of community governance, exchange interest, and token mechanics
- Access to price discovery and resale markets
In contrast, buyers at $0.05 had no such clarity:
- WLFI was explicitly non-transferable
- No guarantees of future liquidity
- Greater regulatory and political risk
- No certainty that governance would even become community-driven
So yes — $0.15–$0.20 is a higher price, but it’s also lower risk with full visibility.
Meanwhile, $0.05 buyers entered blind, when this was still a semi-closed system.
It’s Not Anti-Capitalist — It Is Risk-Adjusted Fairness
This isn’t about undermining market forces. It’s basic venture logic:
In every startup or token ecosystem, early backers often get bonuses or discounts to compensate for higher uncertainty. That’s not charity — it’s risk-reward balance.
This small bonus proposal (which is also locked for 6 months) simply acknowledges that:
- $0.05 buyers paid more than $0.015 buyers
- And did so without the benefit of tradability or price support
Summary
- $0.05 buyers had no tradability, no liquidity, and took major risk
- $0.15+ buyers knew WLFI would be tradeable — that’s a massive value unlock
- This bonus is just a small alignment gesture — locked, capped, and limited
Appreciate the debate — discussion like this makes the ecosystem stronger.
4 Likes
I’m completely disagree. If you bought at 0.015, 0.020, or 0.05, it was your decision to enter at that point. Your proposal is as absurd as if those who just bought BTC at six figures were asking for compensation for not having bought at $0.00076 USD per unit in October 2009.
4 Likes
Disagreement
-Welcome to the crypto world, there ought to all the time be a much bigger revenue for early traders (those that purchased at 0.015).
5 Likes
No : this isn’t the truthful concept 
I strongly disagree. The presale is over — those that purchased at $0.05 accepted the phrases and danger. Lacking the early value doesn’t justify a retroactive bonus. When you consider within the venture, help it at launch. Early patrons took way more danger at $0.015. Nobody was pressured to purchase at $0.05 — that’s not unfair, that’s how presales work.
1 Like
Sure. Completely agree.
There must be an association for early patrons.
If that fund is created to reward early patrons, I’m okay with them giving the rewards in keeping with the shopping for line.
First come, first served. Clear and truthful.
3 Likes
You’re proper, in any open market, merchants make their very own selections.
However within the case of WLFI, the scenario was basically completely different in the course of the $0.05 spherical.
There have been no clear ensures of tradability, no open change plans. In contrast to BTC or different tokens that have been tradeable from day one, WLFI patrons at $0.05 entered with far much less certainty and better danger.
So this isn’t about altering the foundations after the very fact — it’s about acknowledging a novel scenario and proposing a truthful, time-locked adjustment to replicate that actuality.
Personally I purchased 0.015 and 0.05. why the value was elevated? Who accepted 0.05? If it’s neighborhood/governance token then we must always have voted for any value improve by votes. As soon as it’s buying and selling at open market that’s fully completely different and that’s the place your argument will make sense. Thanks for the enter.
1 Like
A greater strategy is to carry out an airdrop to ALL early WLFI token holders who’ve participated within the governance & neighborhood portal.
Participation within the ecosystem (corresponding to voting) and neighborhood may be very way more related, in comparison with who purchased earlier or later.
1 Like
Critically? HARD No.
Many misplaced an excessive amount of cash by promoting belongings early so as to purchase at launch. Do they get compensation for the loss?
Simply so we’re clear right here:
You wish to reward those that waited till the second spherical and FOMO’d in when given the chance at the next value.
Spherical 1 patrons primarily bought previous to the election, earlier than Trump received, and earlier than he was inaugurated. Spherical 2 patrons purchased in after the $TRUMP token was launched and pumped.
No level in any bonus for spherical 2, for my part. Their fault their conviction was not excessive sufficient 
.
Imo of spherical 2 patrons shall be paper fingers, anyway.
