I mean check the result on this poll here…. 35% of people said No to the framework and No to the reward reduction.
But this isn't weighted voting so you get a headcount type result on the poll.
The snapshot vote will breeze through because it's all about wallet size. So could be just top 20% in favor but it'll look like a landslide.
This is not how Olympus used to operate.
sure, but due to this proposal, the rate of induction of new OHMies has slowed to almost zero, many have unstaked and tanked the price - which has led to the opposite of the goal of this proposal as the premium on bonding has reduced by 100%. So, please elaborate on efficiency? And please explain why it is not feasible?
This is about longer term fren if people want to leave because the reward rate decreases then they were always going to leave better sooner than later. It is inefficient for a general algo to set theses rates to 365 days because this may not be optimal runway depending on demand - it is not feasible because no one has written such an algo and it would require extensive testing
Its so funny how the devs only argument is "its better for you, you just dont understand! Its optimal!"
As for me, I learned enough from this forum. Leaving as soon as my investment goes even.
Also now I get it, why there is a "Is this a ponzi scheme?" question in FAQ. Because now it really looks like a ponzi Not in the traditional sense, but with same concept where only early whales and first investors (presalers) profit.
Agreed while I have more Ohm then that the reductions are a bit much, and at a certain point I see it leading to the "end" of ohm. How can one be an Accohmulator with 1000%/100%/25%/6% apy
What happen to "dont look at the price" meme?
If we reach those APYs it'll mean that we all already made it fren - in that respect if we make it to those APYs and have (3,3)'d the whole way then price won't matter - key is integrations as treasury asset for other protocols
Just a quick comment from the peanut gallery. It’s interesting how the market cap seems to be stabilizing as voting results become more certain.
It’s likewise interesting how, in this experimental universe of “code is law,” that social identity and self-categorization come to the surface – old ohmies vs new ohmies, non-whales vs whales, etc. Aside from being the bread and butter of unconventional warfare doctrine, that can also be a brilliant marketing strategy.
Actually, that’s a great sales pitch for people being both happier, and materially better off, with AI mediation of human cognition. Hmmm.
Market cap is stabilizing because overall market is trending south.
Haven't you noticed yet? When BTC and market goes bull, OHM cap shrinks. When market hints bear, everyone comes running back into ohm.
Has little if anything to do with this proposal while still in voiting.
The proposal is great, I'm 100% positive. If there is locked staking as additional option it will be more great I think. I'm sure most of the ohmies will locked a part of their holdings in the name of bright future. The crypto world is booming, so OHM will raise and raise as popularity in the next years.
Hi Shadow,
I try APY calculated according to the formula this link provides https://docs.olympusdao.finance/main/basics/basics#how-is-the-apy-calculated
but the result is not as expected, can you explain why?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LMro-9X4sbiMLD9CIXLmfSyyD44Kpo4fmTl9i-8LsuY/edit?usp=sharing
CollinJMiller
This passed months ago, and we have 10x our market cap since then. You can see there were similar replies across this post, but I'm glad the majority of the community trusted the Policy team on this and so we're here today.
@shadow Where does the policy team project the supply of Ohm in 2 - 6 months vs the OIP-18 schedule? Should we be expecting a decline in APY in the near term?
