hodlmao I don't think new ohmies should wait 7 days until they receive their first rebase. That feeling of buying OHM, staking and seeing those juicy rebases the first few days is a huge driver behind the loyalty in the community.

And the real short term profit takers are those that buy for $100k, get rebase and sell instantly.

The average new ohmies don't get profits enough to cover gas costs the first few days anyway, so they're not the issue.

      Agreed on the 21 epoch warmup. 7 days should eliminate some parasitic behavior without being too long of a wait.

      andrewlias The new holder is still receiving rebases, they just forfeit rewards if they un-stake during the warmup. I do see what you're saying though... maybe if we can implement something in the UI that shows the unvested rewards during the warmup period.

        I'm a new Ohmie just diving into learing about the project and with a rather small 1 OHM staked. I think a warmup between 3-7 days makes sense. And since it doesn't lock you in should not preclude newbies joining 3,3. It is nice to see the componding each epoch, though I recognize that eventually the goal is to approach a much lower price per OHM. It just holds out the potential for a person with a small bag (like myself) to actually participate in the protocol overtime.

        Zeus this is an excellent proposal. Love the clarity with which you write. I think showing stakers their accrued but unearned rewards during warm up period in the app will be important.

          Good proposal but gas fees on eth put me off defi til Polygon came along. With Olympus this is negated due to 3,3 - although the pain of spending gas to claim adds an extra burden of cost and also time.

          I believe this needs to be implemented as soon as possible. 4 to 9 epochs will be my preferred wait period. Showing earned rewards and time before they can be claimed will make for a good user experience.

          my two cents, I think the locked staking idea makes this idea less attractive, since they're kind of both after the same intention, (aren't they?). cumulatively they could have some bad effects we're not seeing as of now. i think if anything, the warmup period should be for 3 epochs or less.

          Hey guys, this is meant to be a warm-up not locked staking already. Are you kidding with any warm-up longer that 1-3 days?!

          Love the ohmies feedback (I'm new here! Hey everyone!). I feel this proposal would make more sense if we looked at tiers versus a standard/more broad approach. The challenge is to solve for ultra-short term stakers (USTS). To address the issue, we would need further insight into how often USTS are coming in taking profits and leaving and then at what size does this negatively affect future rewards for future ohmies. Is there a definitive difference in USTS and stakers who simply liquidate and run following 3 days? Tough to answer... It may be worth thinking through size instead of duration. A USTS with $1k doesn't benefit on an absolute basis as much as someone with let's say $100k.

          Ideas:
          We could introduce tiered warmups based on size (ex. $10k+ 5 day lock, 100k+ 7 day lock, etc.)
          Introduce tiered warmups based on size and reward (ex. $100k+ grants 25% of rebase days 1-3, 50% days 3-6, 75% days 7-10, and 100% in days 11 onward)

          Questions:
          Does size or length matter more? (pun intended)
          If length only, what length of warmup would actually deter an USTS?

          andrewlias I agree, is ultra short term staking currently an issue? How many often do people stake for less than a week? We should probably collect some data before implementing this.

            Wanted to check if we have some data related to what's the number of users who currently stake for ultra-short period and then unstake.

              andrewlias There might be some misunderstanding, I understood that INSTANTLY upon staking I am 3,3 (rebase in effect - juicy rewards being delivered), just that there are a number of epochs prior to your ability to unstake.

              Question - I have 500 OHM, I add 50 more to my stack, is my entire (550) stack now in warm-up period or just the 50 or can I unstake the 550 in its entirety immediately?

                Doesn’t make sense unless we really have a problem with ultra short term profit takers. Even then, the market will efficiantly adjust pricing of ohm until one cannot take profits from such a move (0.005% oscillation in ohm price every 8 hours).

                Prices of equities/bonds increase gradually before dividends or interest payments and decrease immediately after.

                Ex. a 5% dividend payment results in a 5% stock price decrease. This makes it impossible to profit by buying stocks right before dividends, cashing the dividend, and selling the stocks. I imagine the same will happen with ohm over the long term.

                I also struggle to understand how this is harming (3,3) stakers? If anything a market sell of ohm drives down prices (momentarily) and allows for ohmies to enter at lower prices. Let the market find equillibrium without creating barriers for new ohmies to successfully enter into the ecosystem.

                Any first time ohmie understands that the protocol has a pyramid scheme sounding (albeit with a reserve + backing) design to it. It would be interesting to note how many ohmies would feel hesitant to stake given that they know they’re exposed to significant downside (without rebase) in the ultra short term.

                  I’m keen to explore if we can meet the goal here with the locked staking mechanism. Why not just have a lower reward rate for unlocked staking? (say 1-5k APY) And then the envisaged locked staking reward curve commences from 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months etc.

                  I do think there is merit in keeping the system as simple as possible for new ohmies.

                  Hi everyone,

                  If you want to reduce rebase scalping behavior, a warm-up phase of up to 9 epochs makes sense.

                  But another thing to consider, is money actually added to the treasury by the protocol buying and selling ohm from ultra-short term stakers.
                  On average, are these traders actually profiting and extracting value from the treasury, or are they simply playing a losing game?

                  If I understand correctly they buy ohm and stake it for 1 epoch and then sell?

                  Zeus I'm in favor of this chage. Would be interesting to see what the current stanking trends are. I think this info that might help wen deciding on the length. Then again, it would only capture a small snapshot. I think so far the big brains at Olympus have steered the ship in the right direction. So I would be inclined to heavily agree with their opinion on the matter. What do you think its agood number @Zeus

                    Sorry, this proposal needs some clearer explanation - there is an emotional burden associated with a tag such as "ultra short-term staker/speculator" ... but what is the sober perspective?

                    Block number for epoch end: 12800000
                    Epoch rebasement yield: 0.5%

                    Ultra-short term strategy:

                    1. Buy OHM from liquidity pool at block 12799998 for 100kUSD, swap fee @ 0.3% = 300 USD
                    2. Stake OHM at block 12799999, receive rebase yield @ 0.5% = 500 USD
                    3. Sell OHM to liquidity pool at block 12800001 for 100kUSD, swap fee @ 0.3% = 300 USD
                      ==> Net loss for staker: -300 USD + 500 USD - 300 USD = - 100 USD
                      ==> Net gain for DAO/community: +300 USD - 500 USD + 300 USD = + 100 USD

                    This "parasitic behavior" is actually net positive for DAO/community, and net negative for the ultra short term staker !?

                    If (2 * swap fee) > (staking yield) then warmup period is bad for DAO/community.