OIP-63: Reward rate adjustment

yrys83

shadow Will gohm holders be able to vote? If not may I propose we delay voting until they can.

zrcrypto

we should stick to the original oip-18 and keep 7K APY till 10M. price just started to stabilize, a lot of recent investors are bleeding, at least give them a chance to partially recover with the 7K APY. Also, when people bought OHM in the last 2-3 months, they did so under the assumption that 7K would last until 10M. You should not change game rules while playing

zrcrypto

One more thing, voting should be done only when gOHM holders can vote, not before

lukaskorba

yrys83 seems like this is not the case, it'll happen sooner than at 10M which I personally don't agree with but it also seems like we're going to be overvoted…

yrys83

lukaskorba Yes at current apy and without bonds we should hit 10 million around the 21st of January. Which is a month away. So by the time we go to snapshot and get voting done maybe another week 10 days. And after that the apy will slowly decrease to 999% in 4 weeks so we should be at around 9 million. Which seems ok TBH. Since if we had the bonds on we'd prob be over 10 mil.

I hope everyone can vote using their gohm.

Kutu2

I think IF OHM's focus is no longer on getting and retaining new retail investors then this is ok (and corect me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that this is the case…the focus has shifted to getting new OHM partners rather than retail investors for growth)

But to be honest I would hold the APY as is if it were me. For the longest time we've talked about how "Price doesn't matter!" but now we are ALSO saying "APY doesn't matter!". It's a hard pill to swallow and I just think the messaging and TIMING for this reduction has to be carefully considered.

OHM forks are still gaining traction with higher APYs and arguably some with higher engagement.
The messaging for how OHM's use case is superior has NOT yet diffused to the masses and hasn't had time to soak in
OHM approved projects had not had the time to prove their worth (KLIMA, ROME)

with all that in mind, really to the average person the only thing they can definitively rely on when investing is the price and APY…

BowTiedTigris

I think we should wait for the migration to be over first and let things settle. This can get very confusing for people. If the migration was 100% completed a month or two ago I'd be ok with voting yes right now.

machinejump

MaskJiro

Since migration to v2 is under going right now, it's complicated. Dashboard / Dune data seem to have kinda "glitches" atm, and we are not very sure if we have correct data set of the project.

agreed. this is the sort of decision that would make more sense deciding when the data is not fuzzy.

thessalonius

davegoldblatt Right now the APY is causing tokens to me minted faster than the treasury is growing. This puts downward pressure on the price. No one likes the price falling.

federico123

Doing too much too fast. Rushing this through only benefits the early adopters -- and gOHMers can't even vote. Is this whole proposal some kind of joke?

Kelsey

I'm in favor of lowering the APY for the health of Olympus, but I do share concerns over doing it too quickly. The V2 migration and confusion over gOHM caused shock among Ohmies and a drastic APY reduction can have the same effect. I'd recommend a gradual reduction that doesn't create unnecessary FUD among token holders who aren't aware of what's happening on the business side.

IMO, this conversation needs to heavily involve the marketing team to create a plan that anticipates community concerns, especially with the recent price drop already putting people on edge.

lukaskorba

Kelsey I might be wrong but why am I feeling that no comments here matter? Informal poll is saying yes, aka they WILL very likely implement it into the next snapshot so the reduction WILL happen. This is always problem when voting is the mechanism. Imagine 51% for YES and 49% for NO.. the worst case that could happen. This is not binary problem, I hope team will take time to read all comments here and consider next steps carefully, not just based on informal poll because that one is in favour of reduction… I believe this is very strategic move where timing, market, mood of ohmies, every dependency matter… true, also marketing matters…

and don't get me wrong, I want reduction just like many here, but I do believe right now is not the the right time.. especially when 60k people who joined us recently were said the reduction will happen in 2nd half of January.. it was the biggest topic in TG at least.. disappointment will be there for sure…

Owl

I mean there should be a necessary stop at 3,333% APY ?

If we reduce, can we ever go higher again if it doesn't bump the price eventually.

Number go up is important now.

_mp_

I see a lot of people wrongly commenting that this proposal isn't in line with OIP-18.

I'll repeat what has already been said:

This proposal aims to reduce the staking rewards to the lower end of the current window (window before 10m). It is thus in line with OIP-18 and the plan that was proposed at the time.

Kelsey

_mp_ Supply is currently at 7.15 million. That's not exactly "the low end" with > 25% to go. Is creating extra turbulence really the ideal option?

(Asking for clarity, not to be argumentative.)

lukaskorba

_mp_ just like @Kelsey said.. it's totally in line with OIP-18, any value between the boundaries of 1-10M is not breaking rules BUT the thing is that since OHM has started there has almost always exclusively been upper bound value(s)… lowering it to lower bound value for example at 2M would be ok systematically but we're not in mathematical model, there are 80k people with some experience given by the last 8 months with the project… @Kelsey is right, it's a strategic thing.. with very non-empathetic timing… migration, red market, price down, FUD, Christmas coming… what a great present - lowering APY 😉

so the right question would be, can it wait till 1st week of Jan? or even a week, two later? Take some break guys, enjoy time with families and implement the snapshot early Jan… those 2-3 extra weeks can play very significant role, prove me wrong… show me that doing the reduction asap is the only way to go

sukarno90

“Stakers, your job is done here. (3,3) over.”

That’s what it says when we’re dropping APY to the lowest limit while we still have 25% of the APY window to go

OGs are saying that outright, you don’t have to conclude it really

We’ve a year worth of runway and we want to double it so the team can chill at the expense of the ohmies?

And no reducing APY won’t drive price upwards. It only happened before because there were no (worthy) forks. Don’t believe me? See how much bond revenue fell in November (~-80%) as forks proliferated

My advice to the new ohmies is to vote with their money. OGs know they have enough to force the vote and don’t really care so just return the favor and (-1,-1)

Bigbabol

It's never good time to make big decisions.

I have had same concerns as many of you during OIP-18 (feel free to check) but the bottom line is that you either believe that this team is doing everything in their power to fulfill Olympus vision, or you don't.

A month or two doesn't matter if you are here for the longterm. If you haven't held ETH or BTC pre 2018, you might have envyed those HODLing them since, but you cannot comprehend the pain they have been through to get here. OHM is same play imho - it's about supporting big vision that relies on trust, freedom and inclusiveness, but understanding that there are many serious obstacles along the way that can break it.

All I have experienced so far makes me trust that this team is actively anticipating those obstacles, and steering Olympus towards fulfiling its vision.

Fully agree with actively using lower APY in marketing communication, and that it's of paramount importance that all staked holders including gOHM must be allowed to vote for OIP-63 @shadow

Kelsey

Bigbabol It's always a good time to make big decisions.

But it's important to do so wisely, especially with so much at stake (pun intended).

I don't have any issue with ultimately lowering the APY, but there are a lot of Ohmies who entered at 2x+ the current price and it seems wise to be intentional about not scaring them away by abruptly changing the rules of the game. If this is a move to help Olympus fulfill its vision, that's gotta be communicated well… which will help maintain trust in the team.

Bigbabol

Kelsey well discussion is describing it as bad time. It will always impact someone who just joined. Same happened to me only the dip back then was not 2x but 5x. Everyone reacts the same first time.

There is nothing abrupt about it. It is a fact based on OIP - 18. There are few calculators available that project it to happen around the same time = end of December mid January. Why claiming its abrupt? If vote passes it will take it additional 4 weeks to reach targeted rate so closer to the end of the January.

It's interesting how nobody was complaining that through entire period since OIP -18 RR actually wasn't lowering but stayed constantly in the upper band although supply increased 6 times.

Kelsey

Bigbabol I'm just talking about making an abrupt decision that catches the majority of people off guard and creates unnecessary FUD because they weren't expecting the rate to change earlier than when the supply hits 10mil. I understand that the APY won't drop to 1000% overnight. 😉

« Previous Page Next Page »