ok. I see.
So, I will start from some considerations:
1. the @null account has more than 80k POSH tokens, meaning that across the lifetime (threee years more or less) more than 8% has been burnt.
I see that the burning mechanism burns all the POSH tokens from users not correctly registered. If possible, I would cut this one since some bots can start spamming to get the POSH tokens sent to the @null and then diluting the rewards and discouraging other users. You can eventually recirculate these tokens to the Genesis wallet. In this form you will not burn tokens for users negligence.
Token anyway, can be burnt to keep the deflationary process, but token burnt has to be done for other actions, like creating a small pool to incentivize the non-correctly-registered users, really registering and getting a small part of "null tokens" afterwards. In this way, you would incentivize people to register to POSH.
Example:
@poshtoken/posh-1677103200199
49 "null entries", for a total of about 30 POSH tokens into oblivion. That's more than 10% of the distributon. It's a heck high/killing burning rate.
2. Reducing the token payment is correct. You will decrease the selling pressure and in that way price can slowly start to climb in value because you will keep buying it day by day.
If you add this to the change in the "POSH to null" behavior, I think that you have 50% of the solution already here because you can immediately reinvest the small treasure POSH will accumulate every day in the other activities you mentioned.
With bullet point 1 and 2, you may recover 30POSH that are not going to be burnt and reducing the daily incentive to 250 instead of 500. So the saved from burning POSH tokens will be likely the half, and you will be saving 280 tokens in total, 15 just from the Post distribution side.
If summed to the buy-back and the following point, I think we almost got a solution.
3. To incentivize the "buy-back", you can also create some small programs of content curation. Like I said about @ecency Boost program and like also @pgm-curator curator is doing, you send them tokens and if the post is deserving it get the chance of getting curated by someone. You can make people sending POSH tokens so you will have an "automatic" buy-back. To create this feature, and avoid exploitation of the system, you can ask for a minimum of POSH staking (with no APY, just to prove that they believe into the project and they support it by staking the token.
I gave a look at the POSH distribution and they are quite small (correctly, according to total and circulating supply). I would then avoid blocking too many tokens otherwise you would have the opposite result, so if you decide to go for this way, I would evaluate a minimum lockup of 1 POSH (for example) and a number of POSH to be sent to the account of a reasonable number to obtain (potentially) a curation. Based on how much flexibility there is on the smart contract of POSH we can also create a dedicated gamified way to make this to work.
4. Creating this new environment you mentioned would be definitely healthy. It would allow you to sell some marginal (at the beginning) features and creating buying pressure. In line with my idea of Curation (bullet point 3). You can also create some games (like the one from WIN on the TRX blockchain) to be played with POSH tokens and evaluate partnerships with other gaming guilds here.
Also small monthly subscription can help in keeping up the buying pressure.
For the moment, these are the first ideas I have. Anyway, I am interested in keeping the conversation up and running. Even on a call if you feel.
I can also share a "numerical" proposal but I will need to study deeper the ecosystem and getting some average statistics
RE: More detailed info on #posh and #gosh