# P-017 ACCEPTED: Stop Execution P-16 Price Changes

**URL:** <https://talk.tezos.domains/t/p-017-accepted-stop-execution-p-16-price-changes/268>\
**Category:** Proposals\
**Tags:** delegates\
**Created:** [November 26, 2024, 7:00pm UTC](https://talk.tezos.domains/t/p-017-accepted-stop-execution-p-16-price-changes/268 "2024-11-26T19:00:04Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 29

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Snorlax.tez](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/talk.tezos.domains/snorlax.tez/32/118_2.png) [@Snorlax.tez](https://talk.tezos.domains/u/Snorlax.tez)\
**Post date:** [December 6, 2024, 4:08pm UTC](https://talk.tezos.domains/t/p-017-accepted-stop-execution-p-16-price-changes/268/29 "2024-12-06T16:08:38Z")

</div>

> [@Noor](#):
>
> There is no “edit post” option after a while, but earlier on I already told you that I was referring to the [[P-017 ACCEPTED: Stop Execution P-16 Price Changes - #5 by Noor](https://talk.tezos.domains/t/p-017-accepted-stop-execution-p-16-price-changes/268/5)] draft based on P-016.
> 
> Responding by addressing a minor inconsistency while ignoring the core arguments presented in my posts is neither constructive nor substantive. Simply dismissing concerns as a “bold statement” does not engage with the actual issues raised. It merely exposes weak reasoning skills.

You’re making it sound like the original Author of P-016 is to blame for the mentions of ‘loss aversion’ & calling it blackmail etc, when you should be referencing the draft mentioned here. Not P-016, hence why I found it pretty absurd you accusing P-016 of inducing coercion & blackmail when it’s really not. There’s no reasoning skills needed when you’re talking about the wrong proposal, you need to be more clear what you’re actually talking about when you are making bold statements.

> [@Noor](#):
>
> When called out on an unnecessary price increase and a dubious draft the CM and SoG are side-stepping actual arguments out of sheer inconvenience, the MM has difficulties grasping what was written, and the “Researcher” is publicly posting fairly dubious motivations for a price hike to 6.25 XTZ.

Everyone has had their time for input on their opinions on what pricing should be months ago(in relation to P-016) nobody really gave their in-depth views with due-diligence the only one able to be pushed to Vote was the original 3000/650/75/18/3 from Primate. Then Kevin came along after the proposal was accepted for 3000/650/75/18/3 to build on P-016 and change it to 5C being increased over time in increments up to 6.25 XTZ.

A future proposal will be posted with opinions on pricing options and as this is clearly a big talking point, we’re expecting those who complain about the price increase to talk about it when the new proposal comes out.

---

_[View the full topic](https://talk.tezos.domains/t/p-017-accepted-stop-execution-p-16-price-changes/268)._