one suggestion and a compromise between stakers and LPs would be to emit rewards 50/50 a-token/b-token?
could NFTs be used to tokenize the bBadger as collateral? The lending deals with the nft so bbadger can stay in the geyser?
I am sorry to ask and maybe this are dumb questions, but I really don’t understand some of the items described in the proposal and I wish someone can better explain to me. My doubts are as follows:
- Proposal 1. Remove staking for native setts. Does this mean that the “native setts” will not require “staking” and they will receive compounded rewards just by having them deposited in the Badger app?
For non-native setts, I then understand that they will require staking (not only deposit) and they will keep reinvesting 50% of the rewards into the sett and the other 50% will be sent to the “whitelisted locations”.
Proposal 2 - What exactly will be the “extra step” for LPs? From proposal 1 I understood that rewards (if any) would be 100% reinvested (into the LP). Can you please explain?
Proposal 3 - Honestly I don’t have clarity regarding what do you mean by “whitelisted location”. Is it the users wallet? Or is it a smart contract where you can see your “Badger Balance” or “Digg Balance” rewards accrue? Will you need to “claim” them from the “whitelisted location” in order to withdraw them or use them otherwise, or will they just show in the app as part of your balance and you can use them? Please explain.
Proposal 4 - I guess the “badger balance” for snapshot votings will be in sync with the “whitelisted locations?”. Snapshots are supposed to consider your Badger balance for voting including those in the “whitelisted location” so I don’t understand exactly why this proposal is required or what am I missing?
Proposal 5 - I understand that instead of a multiplier (which supposedly we currently have but we have to take your word for it), this will be changed and the way it will work is that the higher your ratio of Badger and Digg as a % of your “non-native staked sett positions”, the higher your reward. This makes sense for me but I am not sure what will it mean for larger accounts that might not be able to afford to buy the “entire circulating supply of Badger” to get a good boost.
I find discussing all 5 amendments in 1 thread is very messy,
Especially when trying to get your head round all the concepts, and take on different opinions
A lot of changes and hard work in this one!! Nice to see the 100% back. In point 3-5 I miss a bit the lay man and detailed explanation of the pro’s and con’s. Number one helps smaller bag holders but number 5 looks like a whale boost, but maybe with a more detailed explanation worries can be put to rest. Makes it hard to really cast a vote.
Same here. Long-term support should be better rewarded than a ratio condition that can be met instantly by any opportunistic player.
I don’t like withdraw fee too but it good for treasury. In my opinion fee should be drop after long time staking. We should vote this and set some parameters.
you say my words. i just cant cote all the answer
we need the fees. its good for the long term on project treasure
Very well said. Proposals that seek to maximize Farming benefits don’t do any good for the long term.
There has to be alternate use cases that generste value, rather than simply “Put Wrapped BTC to farm”.
“The Badger Boost will apply to all non-native setts. The higher your BADGER Balance and DIGG Balance, the better rewards you get on your non-native setts” I don’t think this proposal
is proper, you are giving whales an advantage over those who believe in the project but has little balance in the system, you need a better replacement to this so that whales are not given an undue advantage over others.
- Benefits to smaller accounts - It is easier to have a good Badger Ratio for smaller accounts. If you have $5,000 in BTC staked you can buy $5,000 of BADGER with low to no slippage. If you have $10 million in BTC staked you would need to buy the entire circulating supply of BADGER to match the smaller stakers ratio
@osycross You are wrong.
I voted No for Proposal 5, but if it is implemented, I voted 5+ for the multiplier. Go hard or go home.
@jonto and I took some time to talk this over in Discord. We have agreed to take some time and focus on how to bring a long-term element into this whole plan and come up with a BIP to propose it next week (after the DIGG launch hopefully.)
Here are a few ideas I have up front.
1: The badger setts will likely not be used for collateral at first. In the case where collateral is being taken on non-native setts, we could keep the geyser on the bBADGER + badger LP setts, and use badger as the sole token of long-termism. The you could use the multiplier on the “badgerful sets” geysers to also boost/alter the multiplier on the other sets a bit as part of the badger boost. This may not last forever, but seems like it would work in the short-mid term.
I understand compostability is important, but at first this seems more the case for our crv:*btc and our DIGG tokens then badger. Badger is a gov token that can be more about how you use it on the platform than how you use it off platform. If DIGG LP doesn’t have that many compostable uses right now either, we could also look into using a geyser there (in order to encourage more DIGG liquidity which I think is quite critical around launch time)
2: Use something like (Badger Stake Days in last 30 days/30)*badger holdings to calculate a relative, time based multiplier component.
3: Maybe @jonto has some other ideas, but first DIGG.
If you think you understand everything in this BIP and have ideas how to build a time based factor into our rewards system, please hop over to #governance on Discord and join the conversation.
FYI: After quite a bit of discussion, I will be voting for this BIP. We need to keep moving, and it is clear that the dev/seed team understands the community desire to continue to reward those who are long-term oriented towards badger. Right now we need to get Digg out the door, no reason to throw a shoe in the works over something complicated that can be done in the weeks after launch.
I like the boost idea.
But we also had a mutiplier for native setts. So are we removing it ?
This proposal only mention non-native setts. (sorry if i missed the info)
I’m voting for as well, my views on rewarding long termism align with yours but we can always figure that out later.
I think inherently we want bBadger and bDIGG to be the most useful assets. I think about it like, if a user is in a vault + there’s reasons to stay in the vault + they use that vault token somewhere else this is the best longer term lockup and alignment with the DAO.
With the auto compounding they eliminate farm + dumping since users would have to withdraw from the vault to realize those gains. Which keeps them in the vault.
They will earn fees + rewards in the bBadger vault which further keeps them incentivized.
If we push to have a variety of things to do with bBadger and bDIGG in the market that further removes sell pressure, keeps users aligned and brings value to them.
The easiest way to adjust for long term staking with a time based multiplier is to make the geysers an opt in.
If you want to lock for x time and get xx multiplier click stake. If you don’t want to keep it in bBadger and use it for these things
Oh, I like that. I’d definitely opt into things like that, as I’m effectively doing now already. =)
I have stated before that this project has a great community. I have tweeted repeatedly about how awesome it is, so other people can come join us.
However today I am feeling disappointed that no one in the community has taken the time to clarify my doubts posted here yesterday, in good faith.
@Spadaboom First off, GREAT twitter thread about the vision for badger and the community.
This sounds good, but it would nice to still be able to use your locked badger/digg. I’m super excited about that, and I don’t think taking that away form people who lock makes sense.
It would be nice if we could somehow tokenise the locked assets in a way that they can not be traded or exchanged. You don’t need the complex time weighting components of the Geyser if the multiplier is set by a front-end commitment, so maybe there is a way to somehow tokenize this locked badger with an NFT or something that can also be used as collateral for synths.
That would be a very awesome solution. I’d happily lock a good bunch of badger or DIGG LP for 3 or 6 months for a 2x or 3x rewards multiplier. I’d consider a year for 4x. I think there are a lot of community members from the biggest of whales to the smallest of fish that feel the same. If there’s enough interest that it makes LP/native coin locking uninteresting for people to stake short term, then we’re doing a good job. If it starts to cripple us somehow, we can change the parameters.
This solution also benefits whales and the small guy equally, as anyone can benefit in the same way by committing to the long term success of Badger DAO.