getting rid of minting should help because that’ll cap the TIME/WMEMO market. it’ll get rid of dilution but also have a secondary effect. one which should effectively achieve the same goal as making it so you cant sell TIME/WMEMO because anyone who sells a huge chunk wont be guaranteed that they’ll be able to buy back in. limited supply, means huge sell offs and buy backs wont work as well because a whale can accidentally jump out and not be able to jump back in. once that happens itll all be about the revenue shared airdrop’s based on how much wmemo you’ve got. basically the same type of constant stable returns like you were talking about because instead of more memo, youll get like MIM (im fairly certain)
What could be a reason for not shortening the rebasement periods (to every 4h or every 1h) ?
At worst, it would be useless, at best it would discourage arbitrage trading before/after rebase.
Also doing something like HectorDAO might help where they set a warmup period and lowered the apy to discourage rebase jumping.
@adamg6284 the fact is that the market is down. none of these things are going to help if say BTC is down 40%… the entire market cashed including strong coin nand hector DAO. changing a working protocol isnt going to help when the changes are modeled after projects that STILL MIRROR BITCOIN. if hector dao and stong coin both dipped a ton , like wonderland, when Bitcoin dipped, then adapting measures from strong coin or hector is still going to leave us seseptable to bitcoin falling. in short these change wont dooo anything except piss a ton of people off and may even tank the project. the project you mentioned are still tanking… and they never reached Wonderland heights because of the very changes you are proposing. do you really want to be a 3 digit DAO or a 4 digit random coin thats still getting destroyed by BTC crashing?
@adamg6284 hector has fallen has fallen just as much as wonderland, but only made it to 3 digits, and strong coin also dropped 50% and you cant sell it and its growth is proven to be capped at 4 digits in the last 5 YEARS which, im sorry, its way to slow for crypto. im sorry but these ideas are terrible. let wait until like the system we have is proven to be broken before we go modeling ourselves after tiny projects with way less potential. like nothing wonderland has done has been bad move if you look at the overall crypto market. we’ve grown SOOOO MUCH FASTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE FOR A REASON. the protocol works! it was set up by smart people. its being managed by smart people. lets like wait for proof they aren’t doing their job right before we try to step in and change shit they probably put in place for a reason. and lets definately NOT model ourselve after projects we’ve clearly out grown by LEAPS AND BOUNDS like literally in the first 7 days of our projects life. like why model ourselve after something we’ve run circles around starting our first week. wonderlands price at 7days $1,783. strong coins max price ever? $1193. sure it may have started lower but MARKET CAP is what these DeFI projects are all about. we still overshadow strong coin within our first 5 months by 10X
i mean shit the projects you mentions havent grown to wonderland TIME’s potential because they have these antiwhale sentiments. ever wonder why TIME has grown to almost a billion dollars in its treasury in less than a year? its because we embrace the whales! i want yall to look at those charts and then carefully at this photo. what is the whale doing? what is dani doing? are they working in unison? What is their obvious goal? are they achieving the same things?
pain in the ass to program, maybe a ton of charges for transactions (for wonderland) like enough that the rebases would cost wonderland to send out. mess up current inflow and outflow cycles. unseen repercussions
Ok I understand your points. So doing 24 rebases per day for example would cost overall more (transaction fees) to the treasury than 3 rebases per day ?
im not sure but thats one thing i could see being an issue. you gotta think at some point the percentage gain is gonna be lower than the transaction cost. and 0.6% is really low already
Yes every transaction costs money for the protocol just as it does for us. Additionally I have mathematically shown that this rebasement trading isn’t happening because it is not profitable so why bother with it? 
Thanks for clarifying.
Since these rebases cost money to the protocol, I guess that 8h was the ideal tradeoff between limiting treasury expenses and on the other hand having a rebasement value below the threshold of arbitrage trading fees on TJ.
Are the wales actually staking?
I thought they were just buying TIME cheap before the rebase and then selling at the point of the rebase, when the price is highest. Supposedly they make a few % this way.
Well, now that we had a real life example of how whales can manipulate the system, how do you feel about incentivized locking periods now? Their most recent proposal to move away from the OHM model makes a lot of sense to me.