Back to collectionA Hundredfold Key Split Proposed as Liquid Staking Opens
After the night of Iranian missiles, the market steadied at USD 0.22, but the community’s attention moved to the proposal forum. The proposal began with the existing numbers: the cap was 50,000 keys, of which 35,178 had been minted, with more than 6,400 holders. The two developments addressed different barriers: entry and exit.
A creative chronicle combining project history with imagined scenes. Story events are not verification of network activity.
After the night of Iranian missiles, the market steadied at USD 0.22, but the community’s attention moved to the proposal forum. Sentry Keys affected both node operators and the ability of newcomers to afford entry. An ecosystem partner chose to address the keys’ underlying parameters. Community-built liquid staking was also ready to launch that day.
The proposal began with the existing numbers: the cap was 50,000 keys, of which 35,178 had been minted, with more than 6,400 holders. The earliest participants had exchanged small amounts of ETH for 324 million esXAI, a reward for backing the project when it was young. Now one key cost 1.43 ETH, putting it beyond most people’s reach. The proposed split was 1:100: raise the cap from 50,000 to 5 million, multiply the number in each tier by 100, and divide its price by 100. Existing holders would receive 99 additional keys for each one held, leaving their ownership shares unchanged. Staking capacity per key would also be divided by 100, and the base chance of winning would fall from 1% to 0.01%; the overall amount and existing entitlements would be divided on the same basis. The proposer also suggested reopening the early referral-code system, with each holder using their address as a code. The narrator replied under the post: “I like this proposal.” That same day, community-built liquid staking formally launched. Staking XAI yielded a redeemable token that could be exchanged back at any time, avoiding the six-month redemption queue.
The two developments addressed different barriers: entry and exit. If adopted, the split could make an individual key cheaper, but it was still a proposal, and whether a lower unit price would attract people remained open. Liquid staking had already given stakers another way to exit. Existing holders’ shares were preserved in the proposed design, while participants still had to weigh actual use and risk for themselves. The community’s next discussion would be whether the split was worth making, alongside watching how the new token was used.