BIP 17: Week 5 Emissions

Tbh, I think that the LPs should be rewarded equal by Badger DAO, no matter on which DEX there liquidity is, as they are providing the same service to the DAO. The rewards DEXs offer to their users have nothing to do with Badger DAO. Emissions should be based on what you are adding to Badger, not where you are adding it, as the opposite will lead to fragmenting the community.


Wasn’t the week 4 emissions like this?:

  • (NEW) wBTC/ETH Sushiswap LP — 80,000 $BADGER
  • Badger <>wBTC Uniswap LP — 90,000 $BADGER
  • (NEW) Badger <>wBTC Sushiswap LP— 70,000 $BADGER

Btw I don’t think we should incentivise the UNI pair any more as long as everyone had and has their free hands to move to sushi LP if they feel it’s better for them. If we would incentivise UNI LP furthermore, then the people who moved to sushi LP would argue that they lost their multiplier. It’s just a matter of opportunity gains. I like the proposal.

Supply per week should start to be cut and reduced otherwise the supply gets too much and the price will not have much upside potential.

1 Like

you’re correct but the sushi setts launched on the 28th and are running until the 31th, so only 3 days.

this is why we adjusted the emissions proportionally. the daily emissions for those geysers are the same as if they’d been up for one week.


I voted for this. Liking the Sushi boosties as I believe we will bring in long term users via those pools.


Making it equal will eliminate the benefits of providing liquidity leaving only the risk part. The project would suffer in the near future if liquidity providers decide to take the same risk as a Badger staker… The staking rewards for Badger stakes is very nice and generous…


Voted yes - we are clearly trying to balance the needs of large and small holders. The team is doing a great job of this. LPs are being fairly compensated for risk and small holders who are mostly invested in Badger are also benefiting by the returns they get on staked Badger.

I agree on gradually reducing the supply of these emissions- of course most of these long-term decisions are hard to make until DIGG is launched


where do cover and nxm emissions come from?

1 Like

agreed. I did express I was happy with my badger earned with badger sett. I was just saying if anything… equal as some unhappy people don’t understand that liquidity mining has more inherint risks and therefore is acceptable they have slightly higher rewards.


Yes it should be at least the same

hey, easy @Jmystro we value your opinion and want to help. @cryptomooniac wasn’t intending to ruffle any feathers. welcome to our community :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

1 Like

fair enough, catch ya on the flip

Watch the attitude, contribute and respect other contributors.


we should leave the 110,000 BADGER rewards as is

Great thanks all agreed.


Lets keep thinking about stopping a sudden cliff at end of $BADGER / $DIGG mining and having something which tails up off slowly for months long enough for all the great products to come out so that returns can come directly.

This may be the biggest challenge right now for this excellent project and community.


This^^ should be in everyone’s mind - and is probably.

1 Like

Agreed 100%- we need to figure out how to design incentives that reward users who invest over the long-hall. I like the idea of either a rewards vesting schedule or some expansion of the multiplier that we already use.

With that said- I think the fear of a sudden drop off is overstated. Our core users “tokenized bitcoin holders” and the market as a whole are both looking for long-term safe havens for their capital.

There will always be a segment of the market that moves from APY to APY and pool to pool. But this is not the entire market. I’m sure many of the people on this forum want to stay invested for a long time, our job then is to figure out what economic model best incentives that.


We are hyper focused on developing an emission management strategy.

With that being said there is no cliff for us.

As we turn on DIGG rewards that allows APY’s to stay high while reducing BADGER emissions substantially (30-40%) weekly which in itself would extend liquidity mining for another 12 weeks +.

We also have almost 50% of the total supply in the treasury which we can start distributing if it makes sense.

There will also be a buy back program turned on that will further increase our badger treasury.

Finally we are developing a more robust emission plan that distributes emissions based on users actions. Ie get more of you stake vs dump. This allows for us to reward long term Badgers and change the buy/sell pressures in the great market.

Ideal world emissions never end and we develop a perpetual flywheel where $$ value of revenue generated < $$ value of badger emitted


Agreed with your take and appreciate what you’re building. Take a look at what Celsius is doing with CEL. It seems like they have a pretty good flywheel concept there too.

It would be good if the next week’s emission BIP came out more than ~12 hours before the emission upgrade. Should be at least 3 days or so for the community to decide on weekly emission strategy. As it stands now, there is no time at all for discussion.