Rebases are locked in after x period have passed before it could be withdrawn

1. General Discussion
#38

Yes, but in practice the lock-up period would only be there for 2-3 rebases. Actually even 1 locked-up rebase would be enough to disincentivize rebase trading. Yet, I understand that trading is a source of fees for the treasury, and that most of the times rebase trading won’t really hurt the project’s growth, but at most it would only cause minimal delay in appreciation and volatility.

Still, I was explaining how the rebase lock-up period works, for those who thought that all the invested capital had to be locked-up.

Quite surely, someone who wants to invest in (which is different from trading on) the project would be willing to be invested for at least 8-16-24hrs (1, 2 or 3 rebases of lock-up period respectively) before being able to claim his rewards.
Such a thing would not scare people away.
(There are even investment funds that require you to be invested for a minimum amount of time, and that’s a much larger time window than a few rebases)

That seems wrong to me:

  1. You’re not locking your money up.
    You can withdraw them at any time, either by foregoing the rewards obtained if you withdraw before the end of the lock-up period, or by withdrawing also your rewards if you wait for the end of the lock-up period.
    So the term “lock their money up” seems incorrect to me.

  2. No investment actually carries a guarantee (Not even risk-free investments are actually risk free, not even collateralized investments)

  3. Investors would still get the rebase reward compensating them for the risk they have taken (only traders would not receive it)

  4. It’s not like minting without getting the discount, it’s more like minting while also having the chance to get your money back (foregoing the return on investment you would get from the discount) if you’re not willing to wait for the end of the vesting period.

Anyway, I don’t actually see rebase trading being a major issue as of now.
Still, I would like to know numbers before deciding on whether rebase trading is actually profitable for the project, as some say, or not (and thus having even a 1 rebase lock-up period would be beneficial).

#39

If it were the case, then you should not give higher rewards to long-term investors, which would further increase the supply creating inflation pushing the price down faster, but by giving short-term investors a lower APY. At this point, giving everybody the same APY and making people eligible to rewards only if they’ve been staking funds for more than X hours seems to be reasonable.

Still, if the reason for this is “solving” the “issue” of rebase trading.

#40

I agree with your stance! I think if should be an option to lock X amount of days.

1 Like
#41

The real objective is for organic growth of the project. We need to discourage paper hands. What good are they for?

1 Like
#42

I truly don’t see an issue here. What has Time done throughout its history if not go up? First price test (not caused by this proposal’s concern), and many are already trying to change the system. Do you think Time could’ve gone up like it has if rebase hopping was really a big issue like it’s being presented here?

The real issue I’ve seen so far after reading many of these posts is how quickly people are to try to impose on others their individual needs/goals.

i.e “Well I was planning on using TIME to pay monthly bills so we should do this -insert solution that matches individual needs”.

i.e “I want to use Time as a weekly allowance, so since I only need to take profit on Friday, we should lock up every day except Friday…when I need my money”. Lol…I’m obviously joking about that one, but there were posts that were close enough to the mark.

Instead of this attempt at controlling something that doesn’t need to be controlled, why don’t we all agree to a free market principal where we don’t try to ram our ideas upon each other through a vote specially when it has to do with what we are allowed to do/not do with our money?

I can guarantee you that more money and investors will leave this platform than will come in if you as a community begin to force your views on others. Unless someone is cheating, stealing, or scamming you, this protocol should not take any action to limit the free flow of the market.

And rest assured, other projects will not waste time to advertise how restrictive Wonderland is with people’s ability to use their money. Sorry about the lengthy rebuttal but I truly believe this idea is a mistake.

9 Likes
#43

Funds shouldn’t be locked when staked! This is DeFi! I should be able to stake and unstake as I please. I do believe that higher staking incentives should be given to those that stake and for x amount of time. Maybe ROI and/or APY increases incrementally each day, week, or month that you’ve been staked.

3 Likes
#44

I concur… new money shouldn’t be able to arb time rebases

1 Like
#45

i really like this idea. i dont have a lot of skin in the game but if i hold longer then its more worth it for me.

1 Like
#46

We can do a lock up period and the longer they lock it the bigger piece of the APY they get with it possibly capping out at 180 day lock up?

#47

i absolutely don’t agree. lock-up periods tend to “discourage” people from staking in the first place, not encourage staking. (if i am a newbie i wouldn’t even consider coming here, not even daniele’s face would help) i’ve been in otter clam before and they have this “warm up period” which is the same thing. most people in discord debated like crazy about it until the protocol had to take it down.

actually i’d prefer the freedom to do whatever i want with my money, but if you really want some kind of rules to discourage people from unstaking, how about what babylon dao does, which is you get blacklisted from 1-8 hours right after you unstake (the duration is randomized everytime so you don’t know for sure) before you can stake again. better implement the rule on the way out than in.

3 Likes
#48

I also think this idea is good.

1 Like
#49

I agree with this type of strategy. With this, it will help to increase the price point. However, it should have an option for how long the user wants to lock his Time/Memo (Ex. 24 hours, three days, one week, one month). Also, the longer the staking period, the higher the APY.

1 Like
#50

100% this! Thank you

1 Like
#51

I support that idea, no to punish the short term investor but to give an additional incentive to the long term one

1 Like
#52

I don’t know how easy it would be but maybe a solution would be to skip the first rebase and require them to stick around for the second and beyond

1 Like
#53

Time is in its infancy. If you take an infant and bite chunks out of it and toss it back and forth it wont survive. You have to wait until its old enough to at least try to fight you back. If you invested early on like we all have, we are 3 months in. Why would you want to hurt it. If you want to “trade” crypto and do the buy high sell low game then go trade ethereum, avax, mana or whatever you choose. That is not what the Time token/Wonderland DAO was made for. If you want to support time then stake and goddamn hold until it matures enough and grows up a little bit or we can badly damage the very young and fragile system that is being built. Yes, rebase jumping hurts us, the ones doing it might loose a little but we also all lose, creates volatility. To those people that say “its my money, i can do with it what i please”. Its our money to, you hurt our money and our chances of seeing this thing through when you play a different game on this board than what it was designed for. Either stake or mint right now, there will be a spot in the future to start harvesting. The A in APY stands for Annual, this is a one year game. When i put my money in i knew there was a HUGE chance i would never get it out or see it again. That Is the TIME game, that is why as soon as i staked it turned my money into a memory. There absolutely need to be restrictions in place that keep people that want to play a different game off of our game board. Alot of the ideas here make sense. When you stake you have to chose a time limit that it has to stay that way, 1-12 months in 30 day segments. after the time you chose has passed your free to do whatever. Its a simple idea that we should all be on board with. I don’t agree with giving stakers EVEN MORE rewards either
. How is the possibility of having life changing money in a year if you can be patient not enough. You back the project and play the game we all win, then you get rewarded. A growing or compounding APY would also keep the game more consistent, start off low, if you want to benefit from it you have to stay staked for longer. So what if we lose the weak people or those trying to harm the system for short gains. The ones that will be left are the ones that are actually here to play. Win or lose. Somehow bad actors need to be shaken out. Total value staked has dropped 300 million, recovered 300 and dropped 300 again. That needs to find a balance.

2 Likes
#54

Even the guys at Hector Dao are doing it. They also see it as a problem

They’re going for 2 or 4 rebases. 4 rebases currently has the highest vote

#55

Love the idea but a whale is a whale and still could exploit the system
for example they could staking more $TIME and get their desired rebase outcome

#56

I like the idea of an internal clock for every stake action. It doesn’t lock profits into Time which many of us here disagree with. None of the disadvantage of locked rebase. There would be less rebase sniping. Some claim volatility nearing rebase timing. With this such volatility would be minimised.

other ideas like incentivising long term stakers is pointless since the incentive for long term is already inherent in the APY. It’s dilutive nature is unsustainable unless we adjust to give less APY in the short term and more APY in the long term but this would dissuade new investors from entering. It’s the high APY numbers that attract people after all.

#57

while your stake warms up you can still unstake it but you dont get any rebase if you don hold for more than 2 rebases. This could prevent from whales getting quick in and out, also doesn’t restrict you from unstaking. It’s better for less votality of the price.