BIP 24 - BADGER BOOST (Multiplier Replacement)

After reading everything here I wanted to make some comments.

First, thank you for all your hard work $BADGER team. @Spadaboom @Mr_Po @jonto, etc.
I do believe that this is the way forward as it incentives people to hold onto badger for utility and other reasons and will allow the “small player” to see more value in having BADGER tokens - amongst other benefits.

Although, I do would like to see an option for people to stake their badgers for a higher yield whether it be another multiplier system or not. This is a good compromise as it gives the “die hard” BADGERS a way to “lock in” and support the ecosystem. Has this scenario been played out and how it could affect the planned systems in place? This would give @Tritium - and I’m sure some others - an option. It doesn’t have to be much, but just enough to promote “longtermism”.

Thank you,

I’m going to work with @jonto on a follow-up BIP to create time-locked LP positions that get a multiplier on the LP emissions/rewards.

Hopefully we can find a way to make the compostable so they can be used with the rest of the ecosystem. Hope to see this in snapshot soon, I think it will pass. Maybe modify the text of this BIP to state that we will have follow-up BIP’s in the next weeks to check the multiplier and deal with time based rewards just so everyone feels like they can still vote on it if these are concerns.


I created a quick survey to test interest in a follow up BIP for long-term LP locking per suggestion from @Spadaboom. Please go have a look and vote/give feedback so I can decide if this is worth investing more time in.

1 Like

I see, why just LP positions and not also BADGER positions? I think it’d be beneficial for it to also include just BADGER positions, yea?

1 Like

$BADGER boost is a great idea and modeling $CRV, the king protocol of defi, is a very good idea.

Some points:

  1. Will the $BADGER boost be tokenised like yveCRV?
  2. Will BADGER boost be a 4 year lock like veCRV?

I have followed Curve closely since its inception so happy to be part of a more detailed discussion of pros and cons of the boost design. I think a permanent lock like yveCRV, but remaining tradeable as the separate token (possibly with incentivised sushiswap pool, something YFI have failed to do for yveCRV), might be the best solution. Effectively $BADGER is being permanently burned into a second derivative product.

The problem with no lock is when TVL decreases as it inevitably will at times of lower yield or broad market weakness, you get a double whammy effect on token price as people have no need for $BADGER and sell back into market.


Wait, just to be clear.

Does this new system remove any existing multipliers?
Meaning people who have been in BADGER from the beginning will have no “early investor” perks??

@jonto @Mr_Po @Spadaboom


This is also what I understand.

This is one of the reasons why I have asked if we have actually planned how it will be best way to transition to this new model (and all the implications, one of them being what you have just posted).

1 Like

Let’s wait for the devs to respond to us.

I think there has to be a way to keep our “early investor” perks.
To strip that away from us entirely doesn’t sound encouraging.
Especially thinking that we were the first supporters of the project and like myself - have brought in lots of capital into the project through my network.

We supported through participation in this forum, as well as helping people in Discord, etc. Bringing new people in, educating, sticking it out when others were dumping. And just to take all those perks away just like that? That just doesn’t sound right as one of the “early investors.”

Maybe people can be airdropped different tier NFTs or something (i.e. 8 weeks of staking has this perk, 7 weeks has this perk, badger earned times XX has this perk, etc etc). But yea, I think people who stuck it out and supported the project from the beginning should be rewarded in the long term somehow - even just a little bit. To just have that differentiating factor and a pat on the back of “thank you for believing in us, here you go”. It makes these early adopters feel good about supporting the project which in turn will keep them motivated to spreading it, etc.

By just stripping away those perks, some will feel disregarded and unappreciated.


I am under the impression (correct me if I am wrong) that the multipliers are active in the geysers and that we are getting the earnings as per our current multiplier depending on the time we have been staking. So early supporters should be currently earning more than someone who started last week.

Also, people that supported the project from the beginning are being rewarded with larger allocations of $DIGG.

Meaning that early supporters are being rewarded fairly.

However what about your future rewards - what you would have expected to receive with max multiplier? Probably larger accounts have exactly the same concern as you do.

So a relevant question would be: with the $BADGER + $DIGG you’ve earned for being early supporter, would that be enough to get a good boost so you can maximize your future rewards once this BIP is implemented?

For smaller accounts, the answer is clearly yes. This will be beneficial. But for larger accounts I am not so sure.

Yes, early supporters are currently still earning more than someone who started last week in the geysers due to their multiplier.

Yes, DIGG airdrop is calculated by badgers earned, staked, etc so being an early supporter gets more DIGG.

Yes, currently early supporters are being rewarded fairly - I agree.

The future is the point. I’m not sure, but it seems that after this BIP takes effect, early supporters don’t even have a little bit of perk over the newcomers. Is that right? @Mr_Po

Yes that’s the relevant question.

What would be defined as a “larger account”… or “smaller account” . What are those thresholds?

In my opinion, everyone who takes part in the initial liquidity mining program is an early supporter.
The earlier you started, the more you were able to earn at high rates of emissions.

So early supporters already have considerable advantages as you mentioned, but also the rates of emissions will not always be as they are now. So if you’re a newcomer a month from now, you will have a smaller % of supply distributed your way already.
Adding any cut on top of that would be disincentivizing for new entrants, and thus the total amount of value in the system would likely get lower comparatively.

There are no thresholds for larger and smaller accounts, what matters is the ratio of what you have in Badger compared to what you have in BTC in Setts.
It will naturally be easier for smaller accounts to get higher ratios, but the point is about BTC earning / Badger held ratio.

I estimate that the majority of early supporters who use the Setts will be better off with this change compared to the current system.

But there will be no mechanic here that puts one Badger holder into an advantageous position over another Badger holder.
That is, 1 Badger = 1 Badger.
1 Badger /= 0.33 Badger of a Badger that has been owned for a month longer.

Iirc the original multiplier was meant to be active for the first 8 weeks of the program, not forever.
The new multiplier will bring utility and demand to Badger token, which think is the most fruitful outcome for the early supporters.

Also please keep in mind, that the orignial multiplier doesn’t reward the early supporter per se. It rewards all the addresses that have been staking for 1 month. So in December 2021 ‘early supporter’ would be the address that started staking in November 2021.


There kind of is a mechanism in BIP-24 that favours certain user types. The pure LP/bBADGER holder who invests all their money into native positions and doesn’t hold any non-native tokens is at a disadvantage because they can not take use of their boost. Allowing them to lock in their commitment to the protocol for a boost would give them back an advantage. Sure anyone else could also have this advantage by locking, but I think this will “FEEL” good for die-hard LP’s. So much about crypto is actually making people feel good :wink: @Mr_Po if you disagree we can hash that one out on discord sometime :slight_smile:

100% agree that even our current Geysers aren’t a bonus for early users, but more for senior users as we move forward.

100% agreed. I feel this would be a step backwards…

Would this proposal make make you happy?

1 Like

wait wth haha i thought I replied this on your thread actually not on this one xD

1 Like

Makes sense, thanks.

I agree with this. Some people will not hold “non-native” tokens and only hold BADGER tokens. there has to be a way to give them back some advantage as well.

1 Like

I think it should be tokenized locking and fully composable like veCRV, but I don’t know if such a long time period for such a young protocol as ours is a good idea. Things change very quickly. I think shorter time periods to test the waters would be better.

Yes perhaps.

The thing about the veCRV lock is you get the decay in effect on yield.

If you have 4 years lock at start then 2 years in you need twice as much Curve so you need to keep buying.

If we have a 1 year lock on BADGER it actually accelerates need to buy as 1 month later you need 8% more BADGER to sustain your lock.

And 1 year is less offputting than 4 years.

So even a 1 yr lock would actually secure even faster buying and locking by BTC whales. Agreed.