Who Gets Diluted, and Who Gets the Choice?
Run a treasury transfer, mint, and burn in sequence, then compare holder shares, total supply, and concentration.
- Separate transfer, mint, and burn effects on total supply
- Use holder shares to explain dilution and concentration
- Judge whether a locked whale's allocation matches current liquid power
- PREVIOUSWhen Does a Promise of Future Tokens Become Liquid?
- CURRENTWho Gets Diluted, and Who Gets the Choice?
Run a treasury transfer, mint, and burn in sequence, then compare holder shares, total supply, and concentration.
- NEXTWho Can Change the Supply Rule?
Think about these questions first.
Choose an answer before opening the explanation. You can add anything unexpected to your review list.
Q01My token balance did not fall. How was I diluted?＋
New issuance raises total supply and lowers your share of the network. Dilution changes relative rights and future claims without reducing the absolute wallet number.
Token economics is not only “how many units exist.” After each action, ask whose share grew, whose share fell, and whether the change came from ownership transfer, supply expansion, or supply destruction.
Three actions, three ledger outcomes
LAB / Virtual token
Every action changes a public state table. Ask who can change supply, who can claim, and who absorbs dilution.
Ownership changes with supply and distribution
Transfers change ownership, minting dilutes existing holders, and burning reduces total supply. Distribute from the treasury, then burn community units.
Locked units count toward total supply but cannot transfer yet. Color is secondary; numbers and labels are the state.
Start with the supply map: liquid balances, locked balances, and the mint authority are separate state variables.
- 02
Initial allocation recorded：创建者、社区、国库余额可用；另外 400,000 LAB 处于锁仓.
- 01
LAB created：总供应 1,000,000, 供应上限 1,200,000, 创建者保留增发权限.
Use the slider to return to an earlier step. Continuing from there replaces the later history with a new sequence.
- Transfer: total supply stays the same; ownership moves between holders.
- Mint: a balance and total supply rise together; existing holders can be diluted.
- Burn: a holder balance and total supply fall together; remaining units may gain relative share.
All three can look like “a number changed” in a UI, but their risks for other holders are different.
Dilution is not the same as a price drop
If the treasury transfers 50,000 LAB to a learner, ownership distribution changes but the total supply ratio does not. If the creator mints 50,000 LAB, old units become a smaller fraction of total supply even before market price moves: dilution has already happened.
Burn is the opposite direction: it reduces total supply, but does not automatically make every holder wealthier or more powerful. Who burns, and which balance is removed, still matters.
Expand: how this step works
transfer(A, B, amount):
A -= amount; B += amount; totalSupply unchanged
mint(T, amount):
T += amount; totalSupply += amount
burn(A, amount):
A -= amount; totalSupply -= amount
Market price, voting weight, and fully diluted allocation can each answer a different question. Never use one percentage as a substitute for all three.
What is the key difference between a 50,000 LAB transfer and a 50,000 LAB mint?
A quick concentration audit
Compare the creator's liquid share, the community's liquid share, and the largest full allocation. Then ask which future unlocks could change the answer.