Not a fan because this is exactly like CRV boosting but without hard locks. So it is less risk for the same benefits and thus worse than lock boosting in that regard.
I want to make it very clear that any kind of boosting is very detrimental to the effects we want to archive with locking, especially increase in token valuation.
We don’t want people to just passively chill in the pool, not participating in the token market or even worse dumping rewards because they get boosted by just doing nothing anyway.
If someone wants to increase their yield they must restake unlocked tokens (compound) and/or buy more tokens from the DEX/CEX markets. Only this will boost token valuation and active community participation.
This is a better way to manage the selling pressure then having to deal with Balancer pools and IL so I agree with this proposal, but the structure should be revisited.
That’s exactly the reason not to lockup and boost. As you said: The motivation to stay invested comes from the vesting process alone. Why give an “incentive” to something that will happen by itself? Incentives are for nudging people to do something they won’t intrinsically do.
Liquidity should resolve the volatility, but asking users for a commitment, especially in crypto, has to have some incentive. Locking up Capital is a risk. Nobody knows what the market conditions will be like in 6 months, let alone a year. My Capital is my means of earning more Capital, asking me to lock it up, because I believe in the future potential of the project is not enough. My incentives must be aligned with theirs. They need me, more than I need them. This is the harsh reality of 5000 plus projects. Carrots attract rabbits, and right now we need more rabbits, or cats.
The SNX 365 day vesting worked, however, rather than copy it we should consider modifying it to align with the current climate and reduce the period to 200 days. This will be attractive yet still help prevent daily farmers. Otherwise we may risk losing a good number of investors.
We already modified it by not doing a hard 365 day escrow but do “vesting”.
Escrow is locking rewards for a full 365 days and unlocking it completely on the last day.
Vesting is unlocking fractions of the rewards over a time frame until it is fully paid. Question is if we want to unlock every month so 1/12 fractions or every week, so 1/52 fractions?
I like the idea of moving to a weekly claim model. one question this will this only effect rewards from staking or rewards from staking and savings pools?
I have an idea that would incentivize long term staking, penalize stakers who withdraw early, but also allow stakers to withdraw their stake at any time. What if there were a system in place that over time your % of rewards able to claim went up by, for example, 1% per day up to 100%. Then when someone unstakes, the remaining %(if any) out of 100 would be distributed to stakers still in the pool. So example: I stake 1000 ADEL earning 1 ADEL reward per day (just example) Each day my % of rewards I can claim would increase by 1%. So after 100 days I can unstake and receive my 1000 ADEL + full 100 ADEL rewards. But if I wanted to unstake after only 30 days my % reward available to claim would be only 30% of what I have earned to that point. So I claim on day 30, receive my 1000 ADEL and only 30% of my 30 ADEL earned (so 9 ADEL I receive) and the other 70% of 30 ADEL earned (21 ADEL) is redistributed equally among active stakers. I hope I explained this well enough. I think this would be a good way to automatically incentivize long term staking while also not locking stakers into not being able to withdraw their funds when they want to. Also would mean more rewards for long term stakers from the people who withdraw before 100% rewards available.
Let make the post as concise as possible. Bullet points help or your idea can be hard to get across.
My points:
SNX model is good but we should not blindly follow it. Please note that by locking SNX you can actually mint Synths (sUSD, sBTC, etc) to join get further yield (from Curve for example). ADEL cannot print anything so there is less incentive to lock.
So in other to encourage locking:
2.1. Giving more rewards to the stake pool
2.2. Current holders of ADEL then can see the APY of staking to make decision to join or not. But i’m sure they will considering the APY (has to be high) and also they can claim weekly. Weekly works as current industry standard, please do not change to monthly.
2.3. Where is ADEL from to get the APY rewards high? I think currently rewards of ADEL from AKRO staking is too high. AKRO holders are basically free riders receiving 4x rewards than ADEL staking plus 20% of future revenue. I think the staking rewards for AKRO and ADEL pool has to be the same amount.
Thanks for this clarification. Monthly seems reasonable as it encourages longer term holding yet still allows for investors to reallocate some capitol.
We don’t want to follow it blindly and introduce 1-year vesting instead of 1-year lock. It should be introduced at the very beginning as it was an original plan since June which was missed as we didn’t have time to develop vesting rewards smart contract yet and followed pressure of our community to distribute tokens as soon as possible
It’s about long term token model and as I said was in design from the very beginning. Every project want user to have a long term incentive and that’s exactly what ADEL token holders would like to avoid - have users on board that are not motivated long term and just sell their harvest instead of participating in platform management. Everyone wants governance and decentralized decisions but no one wants to actively participate in it. The project is as successful as its community and we all understand that yield hunters is what ruin project, not help it
@Alex.eth@TheLiquidator I just have one doubt. If team is planning to put cap on ADEL staking( as discussed in other proposals), it would mean that most of the people would be staking tokens within 2-3 hours until pool cap is reached( similar to what happened when AKRO staking was launched on 24th Aug).
This means if there is an ability to claim rewards after a week/month, most of the stakers would be claiming rewards at the same time causing short burst of sell cycles every week/month.
I think there should be a mechanism to claim rewards on Pro-rata basis over the period of a month. For example if i stake ADEL today, i’d only be able to take out only 1/4th of the rewards after 1 week.
Personally I’m against a cap on ADEL or AKRO staking and it’s because that if the cap is reached then there is no incentive to do anything with the remaining ADEL or AKRO tokens, so the sell pressure could actually be higher.
I’m however for introducing a vesting. With no cap and vesting enabled, the problem you describe should not be that large.
If this proposal passes, what would the default option be for existing stakers who didnt know there was an option?
Been a fan of Synthetix Rewards Vesting I think Delphi would benefit from following a similiar style here, great proposal putting your own spin to things!
Synthetix enforces a hard 1y rolling lock from the time of rewards distribution
It helps keeps people engaged in the ecosystem and imo this was great because more people spent time learning what these platforms actually do versus farm and dump
Manual claims would also free up time for the team, the synthetix rewards airdrop took up some developer resource time.
Makes sense though i am not against individual caps to avoid whale domination. But then again a whale can make a number metamask wallets to go around individual capping.
