When it comes to storage projects, many people are concerned about one question—how to ensure the token's value? Today, I want to discuss the design idea behind Walrus's destruction mechanism.

The core logic is actually not complicated. Users need to prepay fees to store data. But here’s the interesting part—when you delete data, the system doesn't refund the full amount, but only returns a portion, and the rest is directly destroyed. This design is somewhat similar to Ethereum's EIP-1559 back in the day, which used a destruction mechanism to reduce the circulating supply of tokens.

Think about it—when is destruction most frequent? It’s when users delete data. An active storage network will have regular data deletions. Each deletion is accompanied by destruction; the higher the transaction volume, the more tokens are destroyed, naturally shrinking the token supply. This way, the remaining tokens become more scarce.

If the ecosystem develops smoothly, a positive feedback loop can form: increased scarcity → better price expectations → more participants entering → higher transaction volume → accelerated destruction → further increase in scarcity. Theoretically, this is a virtuous cycle.

From the token holders' perspective, this deflationary model indeed provides long-term value support. If you are optimistic about the ecosystem's long-term development, the scarcity of tokens will increase over time, and this motivation is real.

But to be honest—ultimately, the effect of destruction depends on the ecosystem's performance. If the storage ecosystem truly prospers, with frequent transactions, destruction can reach scale, and the deflationary effect will be significant. Conversely, if the ecosystem remains cold and transaction volume is limited, the destruction will be minimal, and the deflation expectations will weaken. So, the key still depends on whether the Walrus storage network can truly attract users and applications.