Introduce Warm Up for Staking

RufusXavier

gamelokk I mean, DON'T we have that problem currently? I follow some mid-tier whale addresses and see them 3,3'ing for a week and then bounce, which causes price fluctuations.

bubbidubb

Zeus So HADES sounds like an interesting concept and should perhaps carry more focus. As it is currently, sOHM represents a claim on OHM. OHM have value, and thus sOHM have value. Stakers currently have custody over sOhm while the treasury holds custody over OHM. With Hades, it sounds like Treasury will become main custodian also over sOhm. Treasury can use the new value, not only of the OHM but also the claim over OHM (sOhm) to generate returns on treasury funds. Thats good for Treasury. As an individual user though, I would lose custody or need to continuously claim rewards (and incur X gas fees). The key thing I think is transferability and the enabling of other ecosystems to build with Olympus assets in scope. I believe I can currently transfer/sell my sOhm to anyone. With Hades it sounds like the right to claim gets inprinted into the smart contract upon start of staking. and then can only be claimed by that designated wallet. I am leaning towards more liquid is better than less liquid. Doesnt this drive us more to less liquid? The treasury should be able to acquire a predictable flow of funds without having to limit liquidity. US Treasury notes as illustration, is perhaps the world's most liquid instrument of all? But maybe I misunderstand Hades?

Dropkickdarren

There's a lot of constructive feedback here that makes for a healthy discussion and I can see all of the valid points for each option!

Personally, I can see net positives with two options- leaving things as is with no warm-up and introducing the 4-9 epoch warm-up.

Leaving things as is creates a healthy equilibrium for all market participants. As @gamelokk mentioned with the dividend payments analogy, scalpers can profit in these short term scenarios but the dip also gives Ohmies a chance to continue their OHM accumulation. The more we move towards excluding certain market participants we start to box ourselves into a smaller pool of participants. The Olympus design is so successful because it embodies free market mechanics. It could be risky to introduce a warm-up period considering locked staking is potentially on its way. I think if locked staking doesn't get implemented then a warm-up period becomes essential.

On another note, the 4-9 epoch warm-up period could essentially eliminate this sting staking/short-term profiteering and enables us to use Hades with staking.

Quoting @Animaker,

the minimum amount of rebases needed to be profitable, 5.

It seems this is the 'only period' where the ultra-short-term stakers are profitable (obviously all variables aren't taken into account). We would need to gather some more data on this to make sure that is the case. If we were to introduce a warm-up @Asfi 's point on being able to view the rewards for that period becomes important from a psychological standpoint. Being able to see the rewards over the warm-up period acts as a little delayed gratification tool. The period also isn't long enough to clash with something like locked staking. I think my main concern for any warm-up to be introduced is sufficient data on the different periods that are being proposed.

Keen to follow this as things develop!

Bigbabol

Really great discussion, and strong arguments. What I'm about to say is mainly gut feeling because I obviously don't have any data to support my arguments. That's why I agree that the team should gather and present those. I'll be playing devil's advocate here and just focus on basic principles of proposal.

First principle woud be that we are all here to make money. Now most of us believe in protocol, and long term profit it will bring. Minority are trading whales utilizing protocol rebase mechanism and market structure for fast profit.

From protocol perspective problems are USTS and Hades on staking. USTS is mainly tied to whales scalping, and Hades is feature that team believes is esential for protocols longterm success.

Big question for the team is: Are we destroying protocol basis i.e. Simplicity, for the sake of its feature i.e. Hades? Are we not seeing the forrest because of the tree?
Such things happen in each tech led project, it's natural and in good faith, but can have severe consequences down the road. Can you share how many holders is using Hades?

My gut feeling is that both USTS and Hades are primarily used by those same scalping whales, because both work in their best interest. On the other side, majority of us small position protocol believers just slurps and stakes, not caring about extra layer of anonimity. To suceed Protocol needs a couple of good faith whales and army of small investors. That's why I would argue that whatever team does it should focus heavily on deply understanding small investors and how to make them feel safe (in crypto terms), welcome, and wagmi.

Taking above into consideration, I feel that creating amazing locked staking offer will minimize USTS through lowering unlocked APY.

That leaves us with single question: Is Hades on staking critical for protocol success?

HeyTFox

Zeus Think I would want to see the data first to warrant such a thing. I'm a freedom guy, so I never like seeing controls like this. Although, I do understand where it is coming from. It seems OHM is pretty stable, so why implement something like this? I haven't been keeping up much, so if the data is out there showing a detrimental impact from people unstaking after a few epochs, then maybe. Ultimately, what does the data show?

gnostication

9 epochs (3*3) -- 3 days.

3,3

User1

What would happen to the rewards intended for the Un-staker? Where would those sOhms go?

cryptoNKOTB

hello all,

What would Your Warmup Balance (2 epochs) mean?

It's been a couple of days I have staked ICE. Even now my staked balance is shown as 0. Is there any additional step to be done here?

Thanks,

BobbySchmurda

andrewlias oh they will see it… they just cant take them until the period is over. And the last part of your comment IS EXACTLY WHAT PEOPLE DONT WANT HAPPENING. It drives are prices down and continually puts sell pressure on smaller holders when they see their price plummeting because a guy wants to pop in with 100k or 1 million dollars for 7 seconds to steal rebase rewards and also drive our apy down faster as the supply expands faster. We get it, youre not in an investor, youre a scalper. We genuinely arent wanting that kind of money right now. It turns into panic selling when big orders are constantly being sold off and paper handed newbs just trail and it forms a huge sell off. No need for that. You like the project? Than invest and take profits here and there like a normal human… we dont need people with the option to crush the project over greed.

cryptoNKOTB

BobbySchmurda sorry. Thank you.

TyTex

andrewlias You'd still gain the rewards, they'd still be visible. But early withdrawal would nullify them. I imagine a warning would pop up "Warning! Unstaking before the vesting period is complete (X more epochs required) will result in loss of rebase rewards. Do you still wish to continue?"

itsok

love this warm up idea - beautiful name. i would love a warm up of a month. i suggested: in a different thread if people

unstake within a week: no rewards.

unstake within 7-14 days: 25% of the rewards ( the rest - 75% we do something really fun like redistributing somehow or something else that helps boost the price).

unstake within 14-21 days: 50% of the rewards.

unstake within 21 -28 days: 75% of the rewards

and after 28 days someone unstaking will get 100% of the rewards forever on

Corelli100

itsok The destroyed the whole rebasing model with this forced migration.

TyTex

Corelli100 How?

BobbySchmurda

TyTex because he doesnt understand.

« Previous Page