Over 240 community members participated in the “Shaping the Future of Usual” survey, providing both quantitative and qualitative feedback on proposed tokenomic changes. The overwhelming sentiment is a desire to align USUAL token rewards with long-term holding and protocol success, even if it means reducing short-term yields. A majority support introducing locking mechanisms, loyalty tiers, and buyback strategies to bolster USUAL’s price and reward committed holders. There is broad frustration with delta-neutral farming strategies that exert sell pressure on USUAL – most respondents favor curbing these behaviors through either incentives or penalties, although a vocal minority argues that the focus should instead be on improving fundamentals rather than “fighting the free market.”
In summary, the community’s preferred direction is to reward long-term commitment (via higher yields, loyalty bonuses, and governance perks for those who lock or hold), discourage extractive short-term farming (through lower emissions or direct disincentives for hedging), and strengthen the token’s value (through utility expansion, protocol revenue growth, and strategic buybacks/burns). Protocol-led buybacks are generally viewed positively as a means to support price, but should be executed prudently (using a portion of real revenue) to ensure sustainability. The survey also surfaced some divergent views – a small group remains skeptical of locking or buybacks, emphasizing that USUAL’s value must ultimately come from real use cases and trust in the project’s execution. The following sections detail these findings by theme, with charts and quotes to illustrate the consensus and range of opinions.
Sample size: 241 responses collected 26 June 2025 (UTC-3)
| Key Question | Headline Take-away |
|---|---|
| Who answered? | 83 % are USUAL / USUALx holders, 9 % hold both tokens, 7 % are mainly USD0++ holders (Fig. “Respondent Involvement”). |
| Desired reward intensity | Median score 8 / 10; distribution skews positive but not maximal—community wants stronger incentives without “going all-in” (Fig. “Preferred Reward Strategy”). |
| Delta-neutral farming | 67 % support removing short-farmers; 10 % oppose; 23 % need more context (Fig. “Support for Removing DN Holders”). |
| Locking appetite | 57 % say Yes to locking; 33 % “Maybe”; 10 % “No” (Fig. “Willingness to Lock USUALx”). |
| Acceptable lock horizons | 6 m (52 %) and 12 m (49 %) dominate; 3 m remains attractive (39 %). Only 14 % refuse any lock (Fig. “Acceptable Lock Durations”). |
| Top motivations to lock | ① Predictable APR (62 %) ② Bonus USUAL (55 %) ③ Transparency on global lock stats (25 %). Governance boosts rank lower (Fig. “Top Motivations”). |
| Priorities for the next phase | 1) Boost rewards for long-term holders (122 mentions) 2) Redirect yield to price-supporting buy-backs (112) 3) Penalise delta-neutral behaviour (82) 4) New USUAL utility (70) (Fig. “Top Prioritised Actions”). |
| Perceived protocol–price alignment | 56 % see a “strong disconnect”; only 6 % think alignment is effective. |
| Buy-back sentiment | Positive-leaning: 35 % very positive, 27 % positive, 28 % neutral, 10 % negative (Fig. “General Buyback View”). |
| Revenue-redirect sentiment | 41 % favour a balanced split, 35 % fully supportive of diverting revenue to buy-backs, 24 % oppose (Fig. “Redirecting Revenue”). |
| Theme | Illustrative Quotes (translated/abridged) | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| Utility over emissions | “Instead of higher APR, give USUAL transaction utility.” | High |
| Transparency & credibility | “Clear dashboards on locks & revenue will build trust.” | High |
| Real-world integrations | “Use USD0 ++ in payments or RWA collateral.” | Medium |
| Marketing & awareness | “Protocol needs visibility beyond crypto-native circles.” | Medium |
| Governance effectiveness | “Voting rights matter only if proposals truly shape policy.” | Lower |
Introduce a tiered lock/boost system
6–12 month tiers capture ~75 % of willingness; include early-exit penalty option and public lock-stats dashboard.
Re-allocate part of emissions to automated buy-backs
Community prefers balanced revenue sharing; combine with transparent treasury policy.
Target delta-neutral behaviour explicitly
Two-thirds back restrictions; publish objective criteria (e.g., net-short threshold) to avoid over-reach.
Add concrete USUAL utility hooks
Fee rebates, collateral eligibility and partner integrations appear repeatedly in qualitative feedback.
Maintain predictable baseline APR, layer “bonus” rewards
Stability + occasional boosts satisfies the 8 / 10 reward preference without over-inflating emissions
A vast majority of respondents (approximately 80%) identified themselves as current USUAL or USUALx holders, indicating that the survey feedback comes predominantly from active participants in the ecosystem. A smaller segment (around 8%) were primarily USD0++ stablecoin holders, and a few held both or were new observers. This suggests that most insights are from community members with a direct stake in USUAL’s tokenomics and performance. These participants are generally invested in the project’s success and motivated to improve the USUAL token’s value, although a few responses (including one simply stating “Go to hell”) indicate some frustrated outliers. Overall, the engaged token holders provided thoughtful input on how to better align incentives for long-term growth.