Looks like I wasn't as clear as I should have been. The 'no change' option means total emissions do not change, but emissions to stakers would decrease. The 'change' option means total emissions increase so that emissions to stakers remain the same. my reasoning for supporting the 'no change' option is that we can supplement this decrease through OHM bonds, where OHM holders can convert to future tokens in exchange for a higher yield (essentially locked staking). I know there was a previous proposal to bring it to the lower bound so this would accomplish that, but not a hill i'll die on.
sirsean Will the rewards be the same for all potential pools? Like you'd get the same OHM LP issuance whether you choose to be in OHM/ETH or OHM/DAI or OHM/BTRFLY or OHM/SCAMCOIN?
Is it concerning that this relies so heavily on a function in uniswap-v2? People in a Curve LP would lose out?
yes, all pools enabled would receive emissions at the same rate. there's no risk here when it comes to gamification since you can capture the same amount if you just stake the tokens, but it is only available on uni-v2 style pools as far as i know.
BathtubToaster Also, will people staked into LP positions count towards the expansion amounts?
lets say as an example you have 100 OHM and staking grows at 1% per day. if you remained staked, you'd get 1 the first day, 1.01 the second, etc. instead you LP. the first day the pool stays flat, so you earn 1 (same as staking). the next day, people sell the other token and take out 10% of the ohm side; now you only receive 0.91. the next day, people buy the other token and add 20% to the ohm side; now you receive 1.12. etc. it scales based on whats in the pool right at the time of a rebase. hopefully that makes sense.