So after holding for 6 months their rebase would increase from (example only) 0.06% per rebase to 0.0663% per rebase? That would increase APY from 69k% to about 140k%. Is that what you mean?
No, after you commit to 6 months, you would start earning per 140% bracket in your example immediately, for the duration of 6 months.
2 Likes
I think a 14 day locking period for anyone should be okay
But wouldnāt something like a week or two week term make sense to push out the wrong people to invest
So, you get locked in? ā¦ Thatās not what the commenter was saying that I was replying to. Their comment said they wouldnāt lock people in.
Personally, Iām fine with a lock in option. Iām in for at least a year come hell or high water.
Or perhaps even better, a monthly āloyalty rewardā of an increase of X% over whatever the current rebase is for however many tokens youāve had staked. That way the APY could go down organically, as intended, but you would still get a reward over newbies for staking longer.
1 Like
I donāt think a mandatory locking period is the way to go. If people want to jump in and out weāll just keep collecting their fees. Works for me.
Iām ok with a voluntary lock in period though.
i dont know if this is good or bad, but what i know is that this could become a problem in itself, like, how would this interact if you are leveraged? if you want to pay some of the debt would you be able? it woudl make sense? also, the incentive of holding because of the huge APR and APY its already there.
Also minters, minters are necessary to the ecosystem, if minting becomes irrelevant because on the long term its better to lock their tokens then less people would mint, and how would that interact? people arent leaving as of now, (at least not much people) people were getting liquidated, and all that price inflated droped just like the market bubble of 2008, with people leveraging his houses and banks giving money without any sort of information of how things worked at the time because of profits, here its not like this, i do believe things are working fine and i believe there is no need of anymore rewards, the changes that needs to be done arent making new or more rewards for the stakers
1 Like
Iām fine with a lockup period, but Iām not sure how the logistics/coding of it would work. Letās say you lock up $1000 for two weeks (or a year, or whatever), and then half way into that period you decide to dollar cost average into more. would that reset the clock? Would you have multiple different lockup periods?
Iāve been in since very early in the project, so I have a vested interest in HODLers getting more rewards, but I donāt think a system like that would encourage new investors, which is what will grow the treasury overall.
TL;DR: Lockup period is fine. Clarify the staking rewards for any long term HODLers. Incentivize new investors.
2 Likes
Itās the people jumping in and out selling and being liquidated that had made the price crash by locking in we can know that someone isnāt going to abuse the system
1 Like
but imagine that even while bieng locked he gets liquidated anyways
If itās financially doable for the DAO, then I would vote for it.
A good incentive for people to remain staked.
Only thing is, I think Sifu mentioned that a 30-40% difference in APY didnāt have a huge effect on your gains.
Like adding a new staking option under the existing one? Iād buy some more for that.
You canāt get liquidated for staking.
Once you hit 6 months, you get it for the full term from day 1. Could be incremental milestones along the way.
why not? If you dont bond but instead get debt and stake that why wouldnt you be able to loose it? or arent you able to buy TIME token with the MIMs or any other token you get as debt?
1 Like
How about locking the Rebase, but not directly, so you stake your $TIME which instantly begins accruing interest, however you will only directly receive the interest after a locked number of rebases, eg. 30 rebases, this would at worst mean the wales would most likely be on different schedules and their rebasing buy/sells would have less impact on the price. best case scenario it also decreases the appeal of justing buying in for rebase as being forced to hold for a small period would expose the whales to small amounts of risk.
please feel free to disagree if this is a poor suggestion!
1 Like
Look at my proposal. Its much more nimble
Sounds like a great way for a big whale to come in and whipe a lot of small fishes out.
1 Like
I mean, this is legit happening with the current system.
If you stake for a year, you get the full APY (keeping in mind it varies) and if you donāt then you get an APY based on how long you were staked.
This makes it so much more complicated for basically just locking periods.
3 Likes
Higher token price is the best option