The people voting on changes to token economics are rarely the same people who modelled them.
That creates a gap.
The original token design is usually built by a small group, over weeks, with models, assumptions and simulations in front of them.
Governance decisions are often made by a much larger group, over a few days, with a forum post. So when a proposal changes emissions, incentives or liquidity parameters, the discussion usually focuses on whether the proposal sounds convincing.
But the real questions are deeper:
What happens to circulating supply?
How much liquidity will the market need?
What does it do to treasury runway?
How does it change sell pressure over time?
Those answers rarely fit inside a paragraph.
And if the model used before launch is no longer part of the decision-making process, the most important economic changes in a token’s life can end up being made with less information than the original design.
Token economics shouldn’t stop being modelled after launch. That’s when the model becomes most valuable.