I do think it’s a really good idea, like the system already in place on Bitmax (which offers only 2 options). I’m not sure, though, about whether the 5 or 10 percentage of penalty is optimal, but I think it should be called simply a fee, not a penalty.
I second that opinion. A good balance would be to allocate a portion to stake holders and a portion to a GrantDAO fund for further development.
I like the idea of a penalty that I would label a “premium” for those not willing to wait for the ~14 day unbonding period and particularly like the 1,700 min block to avoid gaming the system when there is price action happening. Allowing a ~24h min period would discourage this but allow flexibility for someone to retrive funds for liquidity purposes.
Overal, I would vote in favor for such plan as long as it is as simple as 3 options to unstake:
- ~1 week
- ~2 weeks
This would provide enhanced flexibility and appease the concerns of many.
On an another end, I would be interested to explore another type of incentive that would reward long term holders in a form of "dividend’ provided every year for those who have staked for a 12 month period and the “premium” collected could be used towards that amongts other sources.
An option could be a “fair” fee that would increase according to your stake. Large whales would pay larger fees to claim rewards and small stakers less fees which would balance the overal fee structure.
- High volume of small fees
- Low volume of large fees
That is exactly the type idea needed in my humble opinion. Its great to see that as a community we can explore and express opinions. This is something that is missing in the world as of late. Keep this up guys and gals we’re on the right track. Even if what is debated does not pan out just talking out your points is important and may lead to something greater in the future.
I think this idea is brilliant to give stake holders choices to make and fair for everyone
Please consider locking the additional unbonding fees and set aside to be earned for mining once the coin max supply is reached.
I think having unbonding period options is a good idea too. But, I think it is better to have a bigger difference in the timespan.
My suggestion will be, split the staking rewards by 10:
- Flexible (Can withdraw anytime) - 1x rewards weightage
- 1-months lock up - 3x rewards weightage
- 3-months lock up - 6x rewards weightage
You forgot for 1 year
This would be amazing. I would like to re-stake and select max time lock to maximize profit.
This type of situation is common with other fintech, if I want to take money out of Cash App I can pay extra for a faster transaction. I see a situation where someone could be in an emergency and need the money sooner than 2 weeks. Paying a premium when in need sucks but its better than not having access to your funds in an emergency.
I am very support for unstacking options. We shall look into the competitiveness of the Zil ecology to the others. Like the 1Inch stacking and governance are well documented. Unlock stacking of 1Inch in Binance is just 1 day. Too many restrictions and ‘penalty’ scare away potential users or community, we need to grow the community and increase the influence of Zil. I want Zil to reach and richness in term of functionality, adoption and community . Or else it become silo community.
New here is well, allowing flexible unbounding periods is attractive to people starting out such as myself, as i was learning more about different delagators, i learned where i rather stake my zil. Waiting a whole month, thats also less staking rewards, so even people who intend to stake long term would benefit from this. It may also create more competitive comissions etc.
I’m hearing a lot of good suggestions here, I’m glad we’re talking about this
I think any penalty, or “premium” is fundamentally contrary and detrimental to the entire point of staking. The unbonding period and gas fee should be the investor’s only determent towards staking, and should be a flat requirement from the smallest to the largest investor equally. If whales are required to pay much more by percentage for the same access to feature, many simply will not participate in a system or project in which they are ultimately considered nothing more than a source of free tokens. Changes might be brought about by simply messing with the order of operations.
Unbonding time paid up front. Stakers must stake for the 24,000 blocks prior to earning rewards. Give a unbonding time of 3600 blocks during this period. Funds remain relatively liquid, but not fast enough to quickly respond to wild swings in the markets. After rewards are being earned, then implement little to no unbonding period. The incentive then changes to staying staked after putting in the time to do so.
Another option you might be able to implement, is elective reduction of APY in return for shorter staking periods that could be used to offset gas for investors interested in longer duration staking. This would encourage more transactions simply because the gas fee is prohibitive to frequently claim rewards for many investors. Faster claimed rewards will compound dividends, further encouraging longer term staking, and will also increase network usage and supply burn.
EDIT: The lower unbonding term would only apply to the skater opting for the lower api, not the longer term investor receiving the gas subsidy. In the first case, minted rewards during the inbounding period would be paid to the grantsDAO instead of the staker.
Wow that was well thought out. I must admit. I kind of like that tiered apy approach but dont make it too low lol. I also never considered it from the point of view from a person that invested much. I guess its hard to look past myself when coming up with ideals. Anyways its not a get quick rich project and long term holding is whats best in my opinion. I just wish that restaking the earned interest was less costly. because compounding is the best approach to earn more long term.
as an investor, i am with you.
with a 24 hour unbonding time , it will cause too much price movement. The reason we can have a good support level is because of the 14 days unbonding days. I think if we really want to have shorter unbonding time, i will vote for a min of 7 days with penalty. All rewards go back to community.
I am not sure the business model of Zil. But for sure we need more people to adopt and use Zil for the Zil to be the very success token. Look into the e-commerce space, many platform losing money for years giving subsidies to get more sellers and customers (participants), yet they loose out to Amazon and Alibaba, just because they do not have large enough participants. . Zil gas fees easily win Ethereum 1000x, but why so many investors and developer still using ERC20? How many gas fee on Ethereum per day and yet the investors willing to pay?
Zil is very awesome technology as compared to Ethereum especially in term of gas fee and many features. In my opinion Zil is in the stage need attract more investors and developers.
I am not sure why need to put in so many restriction on staking as compared to other tokens? If the token having high popularity and value why worry people not staking?
If Zil can go up 100%, i belief the new investors and capital inflow to Zil will increase by 10x. If the price will maintain at the step level, even the half of the 10x inflow capital go away, there still 5x increase of capital and most likely the 5x new capital will stake.
With more investors will attract more developer projects and hence increase value of the Zil. The loyal investors will surely win both in staking rewards and capital gains. Look at the success stories of how the early investors of Amazon, Google etc.
I was hoping to see something like this. Every one would benefit from a DAO especially our precious ZILLIQA. Hopefully we can make this a reality
i think that if something like this was to happen then the penalty should be higher. if anyone wants to trade ZIL or any other token the blockchain that would be fine but as a long term holder i do not want people to abuse the system. specially whales that might have a bigger bag. By them staking they are taking advantage of the percentage then dumping it on the market.
isn’t that literally what a percentage based fee does?