From initial skepticism to current understanding, my perception of the LISTA project has gone through an interesting journey.

When I first encountered it, like many cautious investors, I had the same concern: Will the token unlocks by the team and early investors cause a dump? This is indeed a hurdle that any rational participant cannot ignore.

But after delving into LISTA's economic model, my perspective changed. The project clearly does not shy away from this issue; instead, it has built a rather aggressive deflationary defense system to hedge against inflationary pressures.

The most radical move is permanent token burn. The community proposal plans to burn 200 million LISTA tokens in one go, directly reducing the total supply from 1 billion to 800 million. Such a significant supply reduction sends a strong signal to the market.

Next is the buyback and burn mechanism. The protocol uses a portion of the ecosystem-generated revenue to buy back LISTA tokens from the market and burn them. The logic is simple—more active ecosystem participation and higher income lead to more aggressive burns. This effectively converts growth into scarcity, creating a positive feedback loop.

Additionally, the widespread use of staking and locking tokens. Whether locking for veLISTA to earn rewards and governance rights, or staking in other scenarios, these actions freeze tokens out of circulation, effectively reducing selling pressure.

Of course, token unlock schedules still exist—this is a fact. But the key is the net effect. When active, mandatory burns and lockups are strong enough, they can offset or even surpass the passive inflation releases. It appears that LISTA, through these aggressive proposals, demonstrates control over supply.

Therefore, my current attitude is cautiously optimistic. Evaluating a project is not just about how many tokens it has issued, but more importantly, whether it has the resolve and means to burn and lock tokens. I approve of LISTA’s approach and execution in this regard.