Rebases are locked in after x period have passed before it could be withdrawn

1. General Discussion
#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.

#58

This is a great idea, I think even a 1 day lock up period. Or even a fee to un-stake early. Which would go to the treasury.

2 Likes
#59

I understand the sentiment of trying to implement this type of a reward system to greater incentivize long term staking; however, it seems to me that we are trying to make decisions that have a real impact everyone’s ability to grow their Time through rebases when in all reality we don’t know how much of an impact these people that move in and out after rebases is actually having on the price.

Why do we think that this is the main reason that the price has gone down? What proof is there to show the direct correlation besides some peoples assumption? I bring up this question because price is affected by many factors and it quite honestly does not seem to me that this “problem” has as much of an impact on the price.

We also need to take into account the fact that there have been massive liquidations due to people taking unhealthy loans on their collateral or even leveraging. Making this type of change would not address this issue and as I stated above, we don’t even know which issue affects price the most.

Furthermore, I am new to this space so there is a lot that I need to learn, but from my understanding the protocol was written specifically to provide token holders with a rebase incentive in order to help prevent dilution… So if we start out only receiving a fraction of the rebase incentive, by the time we get to 90 or 120 days or whatever arbitrary target, users will be very negatively impacted by inflation.

APY is not a revenue model that is going to last forever. It has been stated that the goal is to eventually shift to a dividend type system, in which new coins will stop being minted and thus inflation will not be an issue anymore.

I have invested in this project because I actually like the vision of the founders going forward and believe that it is sustainable. So I want to be able to accrue as much Time as possible through rebases before a vote comes out to switch the revenue model, which I believe is when we will truly see the price begin to climb the way we all hope it would.

Finally, whales will always have an advantage. What would stop them from only selling 25, 50, 75% of their massive positions so that they can continue to unstake after rebases. As long as they hit the highest benchmark and don’t unstake their entire position absolutely nothing would change.

Sorry for the long post, I hope that I have expressed my views in a coherently.

I am against any changes to the APY structure because for the reasons above I feel that it will do more harm than good.

5 Likes
#60

We just need to move to “dynamic rebasing” and people who stake are rewarded per block…

Not a shill, but sol invictus is already doing this…

The Great Event. The Great Event.. Dynamic Rebasing comes to Invictus. The… | by Sol Invictus | Nov, 2021 | Medium

#61

I like the idea of fee

1 Like
#62

No, all you do is delay the drop. And it will be a compounded drop by then.

Ideally we should simulate different scenarios to anticipate the different outcomes.

#63

@AlbertoS61 a great idea. As an early investor in World Mobile Token (WMT) I am exposed to the exact same/very similar mechanic.

Furthermore, we could have these “lost” rewards added to the treasury. Do you think that would be a good idea?

1 Like
#64

Lock everyone in to a minimum 6 month stake. We all win

#65

Absolutely NAY. If this comes into effect, I am gone.

#66

blocking rebases are not the solution but IN ORDER TO prevent whales and their swing trading we should instore a tax for unstaking like 20 or 30 % THAT GOES TO THE TREASURY … golds
tandard DAO is gonna do it soon …

1 Like