I think that this is the right approach in order to make the project sustainable long term. At the same time I think itβs important to describe the vision holistically, including the partnerships in the works and others to come, along with anything else. This to say that the extreme focus on apy and price could make us all miss the bigger point: what we need is an ultimate use for OHM and large scale adoption, that is the problem to solve for. I trust the team that we have in charge of this and appreciate the openness of the debates.
OIP-11: Reducing reward rate
In favor. Extremely high yields should be reserved to locking/bonding for sustainable growth.
JFry4 while we are all here for the good of the project, I think we all have the intention of collecting as much OHM as possible. Keep the high apy for a couple more months is a reward for us early adopters and incentive for new comers like it always has been.
fakeSavian people will say this exact same thing in several months when we are out of runway.
abipup Mute point. The vote is now. The vote wont be in serval months and theres enough runway to facilitate 2 more months.
fakeSavian It isn't moot. There will always be those that don't want to reduce the reward rate. Early investors will still be rewarded. Olympus is just asking that they be a little more patient in receiving those rewards.
Waiting 2 more months just kicks the can down the road.
- Edited
JFry4 You're missing the point, i'm not sure if you're doing it intentionally at this point. The vote is now. There is no can to kick down the road if its already been decided to reduce the rewards. The only thing is that it happens in 2 months over the course of three weeks.
- Edited
fakeSavian sorry, not sure I understand what you're saying. We should definitely not wait to execute this for 2 months when we have run the runway way down.
fakeSavian keep in mind that slowing reward rate doesn't immediately increase the runway. It's a second order change to the rate at which we consume or add to the runway.
fakeSavian Nah, dawg. I'm not intentionally missing the point, but I am missing it .
I thought you were arguing for delaying the reward rate reduction until August/September?
Honestly, it seems like a slow closing of the door by people who were in early to those who just arrived at great expense...
I want to see a debate between the people saying it's unfair to new people, and the people saying it's unfair to the OG's.
I am a simple degen in awe of the brilliance of Ohmies. So to me there's some things unclear; I would like to see a clarification on how slashing the reward rate will interact with locked staking. Is the rebase rate of .50% and an APY of 20k+ based on normal staking (so with booster of locked staking, this would be higher??) or is this the maximum amount that can be gained with locked stacking for a year?
Revolutionary_Mang033 I can say with 100% certainty that the 20k APY we'd see with slowed rewards rate staking is not tied to the APY we could see by locking for 1 year.
I can't say with any certainty here what exactly the APY would be for 1 year locking. We can discuss more about it in OIP-9 if you want!
Anschel Also agree with a lot of points here. why can we not start with locked staking first and then see about this later down the line??
abipup So the APY for locked staking could be higher??
Revolutionary_Mang033 Let's talk in OIP-9
I understand that increasing price isn't the intention. The point I was agreeing to was that some of us went in close to ATH (all time high) and so implementing these proposals now will negatively effect people that bough OHM at ATH where as if they are implemented from $1400 upwards then it won't negitively effect OHM holders.
Additionally, Imagine proposals are introduced today while someone locked their funds into OHM / FRAX LP for 1 year. They would be very angry.