# Reduce Validator Set to 120 **URL:** \ **Category:** Proposal Discussion\ **Tags:** passed\ **Created:** [February 4, 2025, 6:20pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-validator-set-to-120/3454 "2025-02-04T18:20:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 28
**Author:** ![in3s.com](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/in3s.com/32/335_2.png) [@in3s.com](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/in3s.com)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2025, 3:01pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-validator-set-to-120/3454/28 "2025-02-17T15:01:52Z")
> [@Restoration of Osmosis Max Supply to 1 billion](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restoration-of-osmosis-max-supply-to-1-billion/38/9): > > [in3s.com osmo1rcp2](https://commonwealth.im/profile/id/65527) • 7/4/2023 Sending to 0x0 is not a burn; therefore it should not be given the false equivalency. Why does it matter? Because on coingecko, etc incorrect values for circulating supply will be reported. That matters a lot to people looking to buy OSMO. A burn module is trivial to implement and has its own address, so anyone can truly burn tokens, eg the community pool. We should do the right thing that requires a little bit of work but provides a mechanism that truly burn… --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-validator-set-to-120/3454)._