uliner ser this is 100% an implementation of reward rate change under the OIP-18 framework. We are smoothly adjusting to the max reward rate allowed by the 10M-100M band.
Nothing to sneak in if we're blasting forum posts, AMA's, and announcements everywhere about it… take the FUD out of the forum please, this is supposed to be a productive conversation area.
Never the best news for latecomers like me, but it is my understanding that it has to happen sometime.
It's time to move to the next phase. If we want this project to have all the long term potential possible, we have to bacome more sustainable. Let's do it.
So what if we airdropped the remaining 3M tokens to every ohmie that migrated and put the rate at 1,000%?
domPablo Agree. The APY is not being adjusted as reflected on the homepage with the drop in price the connection to APY and price does not seem to be real when price drops APY should rise when there’s a selloff APY should rise decreasing APY is fine if you have a big stack but new investors and the average person is forced to look for better yields reducing to the minimum now I think it’s a mistake
I don't think this should happen until January. Seriously.
APY should be progressively lowered as proposed and approved in OIP-18.
If the reward rate is slowed, we will not hit the 10 million supply mark in January. it will take us longer to get there at a slower reward rate.
Can you outline the consequences of just letting it naturally reduce via OIP-18? We have a decent amount of runway, and the supply growth is still healthy.
Remember there's opportunity cost here there should be an award proportional to the amount of risk holders are taking on and given the high price volatility and rapidly changing liquidity I still believe there a lot of risk to investing in OHM. Not to mention that it sort of punishes new ohmies who bought in recently.
I support this project 100%. The community is amazing and I'm sure the team works extremely hard, but I'm still unclear about the proposed benefits of this reduction.
Having to collect $2M in RFV via bond sales has been sustainable so far, right? What are we getting by reducing the rewards rate other than runway?
davegoldblatt This question should really be answered when the Olympus policy team gets a chance.
what a joke, OIP-18 is already a joke, now this.
i-feel-so-al-ohm I think there's a general misunderstanding about OIP-18.
There is no natural decrease thru OIP-18. Proposals like OIP-63 are the "natural decreases" as a result of OIP-18. That framework only formalizes our guard rails, but the goal isn't to run head first into the guard rails.
Some various benefits of having lower APY:
If we are going to do it, do it. LFG. Cut the reward rate and do it quickly--don't drag it out over an agonizingly long 4 weeks. Rationale: the market is flooded with forks that offer exorbitant reward rates and operate on fast, low cost blockchains. How do you compete with forks that offer 1 billion APY and gas costs of 0.3 cents? Do you offer 2 billion APY and 0.2 cents? No! To win in a battle for market share with an ever-growing number of competitors (imitators, perhaps, but still competitors) you emphasize your strengths.
OUR STRENGTH: You invest for one reason: INCOME GENERATION. You choose to buy OHM because you want PEACE OF MIND. That's it. So you can sleep at night. Olympus was first to market. Zeus created this brilliant economic model that our team continues to improve. MeTooDAO and GetRichQuickDAO can only attract capital by having higher APY's or cooler memes or locating on the next lightly traveled ultra-hip block chain.
So JUST DO IT. Make OHM the responsible reserve currency option. Don't try to cater to high-APY junkie-lust. Instead, offer people a RESPONSIBLE CHOICE: 1000 APY. A HIGH but SUSTAINABLE RETURN. Our runway? As far as the eye can see. Olympus doesn't need all the business--we just need to mark OUR territory and defend it with reliability, fee generation, and market share dominance. In short: BE THE BEST, FUCK THE REST.
CosmicRadii i think part of reason for the sudden proposal is because bond revenue has not been growing as expected or as much as they would have liked! i am just thinking out loud
To assess whether APY needs to be adjusted, I think we can introduce volatility as a metric
You're probably right. Just thinking out loud. The real question, though, is how does OHM get to be the cool kid in the neighborhood again? Recapture that DeFi SOHMmer magic. It's clear from Zeus' and Shadow's public statements that if the reward rate is (a lot) lower, (institutional, and hence net) demand will increase. Market cap, bond revenue generation and asset value will follow.
Does this proposal mean to happen immediately after voting or the idea to make it happen when 10M supply is reached still holds? Last 5 days APY has been screwed and many feel the impact of lower APY when it wasn't supposed to be there, give all people one more punch by lovering it in 6 days from now might not be the best idea…
