First, I want to talk about something that isn't very exciting, but I think it's one of the most important topics about Pi. This post is a bit long,,
One of Pi's biggest strengths, in my opinion, is its transaction fee. ( Min 0.01 ~ )
What do I mean by that?
As you know, the base transaction fee on Ripple and Stellar is only about 0.00001 XRP or 0.00001 XLM. It's basically free. That's because those blockchains were designed to handle a huge number of transactions, and they operate with a relatively small number of non-profit validator nodes.
( many decentralized blockchains, node operators earn revenue from transaction fees)
Now, when you look at what Nicolas has built with Pi, you can see that many parts of the blockchain are similar to Stellar. However, there's one major difference: Pi starts with a minimum transaction fee of 0.01 Pi.
This isn't just about having less decimal places. I think it shows that Nicolas had a different idea for how transaction fees could be used.
For reference, both XRP and Stellar burn their transaction fees. The amount is very small, but every transaction permanently reduces the total supply. That means the more people use those networks, the more scarce the tokens slowly become over time. Of course, today the effect is still small because new supply is much larger, so both are still inflationary overall.
Back in 2023 If you look at the post I linked below , you'll see that I've actually been hoping Pi's fee would become higher than 0.01 Pi for years.
https://t.co/0nLYrNDRpd
Most people wanted the fee to become smaller. Nicolas also mentioned that transaction fees could be reduced in the future.
But my opinion has always been different. I believed that for the next several years, the minimum fee should stay at 0.01 Pi, and when network traffic increases, it could even rise to 0.04 Pi or more.
Again , transaction fees would only increase when the network becomes "congested". otherwise, It will be 0.01
This idea is already mentioned in the White Paper. There was even a hint in one of Pi Core Team's wallet Shorts videos where the transaction fee shown was around 0.04 Pi. I don't think that number was chosen randomly. I believe it was intentional.
Right now, however, almost everyone simply pays 0.01 Pi, because Pi's network is only processing around 1-2 TPS (transactions per second). That's a very low level of activity, so there is almost no congestion, and the minimum fee is more than enough.
Now, if you read the links below, you'll see that I didn't suddenly start talking about token burns because of the recent price crash.
https://t.co/8C5Nsl6ZED
https://t.co/s84WDMmJHC
https://t.co/CexYxj9nEI
I've been saying for years that Pi should eventually introduce fee burning.
Here's what I mean.
The fee-burning systems used by Ripple and Stellar have only a very small deflationary effect because their fees are so tiny.
But Pi is different.
If the minimum fee is 0.01 Pi, and in the future users are paying 0.04 Pi or even more, then burning part of those fees would no longer be a tiny deflationary mechanism. It could have a meaningful impact on the circulating supply, while also giving investors much more confidence.
We all remember Ethereum's London Hard Fork in 2021.
Before that upgrade, transaction fees mainly rewarded validators. After EIP-1559, the base fee started being burned instead. That became one of Ethereum's biggest tokenomic improvements.
Ethereum's price didn't rise only because supply was reduced. A deflationary mechanism also changed investor psychology. It gave holders more confidence that the asset would become scarcer over time, encouraging people to hold longer or even buy more. That positive burn system helped support the price.
With fees between 0.01 and 0.04 Pi, the network could still reward nodes while burning 50% or even more of the collected fees.
If that happened, then every payment, every token transfer, every game, every social app, and every application built on Pi would generate transaction fees—and every one of those transactions would slowly reduce the circulating supply.
People would naturally start thinking:
"Every time Pi is used for payments, games, token creation, or social apps, transaction fees are burned, which keeps reducing the supply."
"We just need to be a little more patient. Once the day comes when the Pi Wallet and the ecosystem are widely used, a transaction-fee burn policy could help control the circulating supply and give Pi some real scarcity."
That kind of expectation is what could give holders confidence in Pi's long-term token economy.
However, Pi's transaction fee policy still has not been announced. What disappointed me even more is that there has been no action, even during a period when the price has fallen so sharply.
I did not suddenly bring up this " burn Pi " idea just because the price dropped. Personally, I have always seen this as one of Pi's strongest potential tools, and it is something I have been waiting for over the past several years.
Policies that control market supply in order to increase or protect an asset's value are used across many different kinds of assets. That is why I find it difficult to accept the excuse that Pi is somehow different from everything else.
So I wanted to briefly explain why I have supported Pi's current base transaction fee, why I have said that an even higher fee could be acceptable, and why I have consistently supported burning part of those fees.
@PiCoreTeam @nkokkalis #Pi #PiNetwork #파이 #파이코인 #파이네트워크 #파이수수료 #Pifee
