First of all, I want you to know that I get your point and I actually appreciate your effort in trying to push your idea forward even if I completely disagree with it JUST because of the fee increase.

This should be two separate talks, first a proposal to burn (or send to DAO) 1% of the fee and another one to increase the fee to burn an extra 1%. You are just making your life harder by mixing the two and you'll never get the true feeling of the community (and even create a bad sentiment) since there are mixed concepts within the same proposal. I'm pretty sure almost 100% of the community would gladly vote YES (myself included) to burn/DAO 1% and most of them would vote NO to increase fee by 1%. Only third party markets would even think of voting no to burn 1% since they would be the only ones who'd lose (the others already pay 5% anyway) and even then I don't really think they would vote against the community, they'd just take the loss as they already are with the current proposal.

Burning or sending to DAO makes very little difference since they'd still be "out of circulation" for the foreseeable future, this proposal is mostly just getting more traction because it is a redo, not because it is burning. There is also the fact that burning DEC just for the sake of decreasing supply won't do much for its value if demand does not increase. While demand is low, DEC price will be low, it is just that simple. We are in a bear market with lots of uncertainty, DEC price is bound to be below "PEG" since it's not really pegged to any real currency. Burning everywhere we can just to attempt to pump price and kickstart the flywheel is just a bad practice since it won't ever reflect demand and it is just what "shitcoins" like SafeMoon and alike do to pretend they are more valuable than they actually are. The flywheel WILL come when either land burns through a bunch of DEC or the game is becoming popular again, in either case it's when DEMAND for DEC increases, as it should be. It shouldn't be at the cost of the CURRENT playerbase that keep investing (or hold) during a bear market.

You claim it's more fair for everyone to lose a little, hence the 1% increase. I'd argue that is just false. Just because one side is getting hurt, doesn't mean the other side also has to get hurt just to make it "fair". That is anything BUT fair, you are hurting the whole playerbase with 1% just to be "fair" to a handful of accounts (third party markets) that have already profitted thousands from this game. Hurting thousands of players for every third party market is NOT fair. A 4/1 approach would mantain the fee at a total of 5%, not hammer down on third party markets more than your current approach ALREADY does AND above all NOT harm EVERYONE that holds assets in the game.

It saddens me this actually has a very good chance to go forward when in reality a lot of people disagree partially with the proposal just simply because you are mixing two different propositions into one and putting it out a second time while barely changing it. It is just now you are getting most other whales to support it which in reality is all you need since your votes have a tremendous weight on the outcome (which is fair since you invested more).

Your main idea is very good and I doubt anyone disagrees with it (to use a "small" % of the fee for community itself, either by burning or sending to DAO), but increasing the fee is a terrible idea, rewards are already becoming so low in this game with soulbound cards, no DEC rewards that can be invested back into cards/rents without having to go through exchanges, assets (cards and packs) depreciating, etc, why would you want to cut an extra 1%? The less fees we have on transactions, the more activity the game will have and the more alive the market will be. People won't have to fear buying and selling cards left and right because they lose a % every time they do it.