- Edited
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!