• General

  • RFC - Amendment to OIP-85: Emissions Adjustments When Reserve Bonds are Paused

Summary

In OIP-85, the community voted in favor of reducing the reward rate to the bottom of the current tier (0.1186%) when certain criteria are met. Unfortunately, the set of criteria listed in that proposal were too ambiguous to actually be implemented by the policy team.

Motivation

The rationale for emissions reduction is covered well in the initial RFC and subsequent forum post for OIP-85.

This proposal is to reduce the current reward rate, which was set out in OIP-18 with the expectation that emissions at the current reward rate (0.1587%) would be needed to offset dilution from bonds. When reserve bonds are paused, as they are currently, the significant decrease in dilution from bonding activity allows for emissions to be reduced.

Proposal

Should we reduce the reward rate to the bottom of the current tier?

    This is the intent of the original OIP and the language here seems unambiguous.

    Necessary clarification for this, thank you!

    4 days later

    Voted no on this.

    While the RFC does indeed make OIP-85 less ambiguous, the underlying premise is still flawed as long as only USD currencies are counted as reserves.

    Suggest any reductions be done after a broader discussion on what exactly is a reserve asset? Highly recommend Olympus move to add BTC, ETH as reserve assets too hence also opening up bonds for those as reserve bonds.

    If anything, BTC and ETH if reserve assets, should have bonds open right now so the treasury can accumulate as much as possible. While this would be open to community discussion, 1/3rd of the reserves should be in native digital assets.

      dodecahedron
      Lowering the emissions rate matters only to those who are unstaked, ie the DAO and Treasury's LP bonds. So vote yes if you want more value to go to the DAO/Treasury. Vote no if you want more value for stakers.

      This is an extremely marginal issue.

          electo I'm not quite sure how the underlying premise is flawed here. All reserve bonds (i.e. non LP) are turned off at the moment, meaning stakers are objectively getting less diluted than they would if reserve bonds were turned on.

              bubbidubb Framing this as an antagonistic, zero-sum vote for "value" going either to the DAO or the community is incorrect and misleading.

              Unnecessarily minting more OHM to offset bond emissions that aren't taking place isn't redistributing value--it's just creating unjustified inflation. Yes, this affects the DAO's holdings (which the community should care about as well) but it also has a deleterious effect on the price of OHM, neither of which are positive for stimulating external demand to enter the econOHMy.

                  dodecahedron

                  I did not see it as antagonism. It just is what it is. But if you propose something, you might want to spell it out what it means to each stakeholder party. Maybe its overall good, maybe its not. Just be transparent.

                    Write a Reply...