I should have explained the XTZ “essentially 5 weeks” better. As I didn’t really want to go into the mechanics of comparison of staking mechanisms. I understand the liquidity is instant. I tried to sum that up in one sentence but apparently it didn’t come across very well. Sorry if you feel wronged by that?
For XTZ benefit of instant liquidity, its mechanism for reward payout keeps as much new investors out than in.Talking about XTZ staking/unbonding mechanisms forwards this proposal either way. Can we consider this misunderstanding XTZ closed? Thanks.
There is no evidence that increasing the unstaking lockup period brings price stability.
Agreed, there is no correlation between staked % and price action in the chart as you mention with points a,b - driven mostly by sentiment and news.
It does have an impact on velocity therefore lessens sell pressure. Obviously if you make users that are staking hold for an extra two weeks, that will have an impact on the price (they aren’t unbonding to buy).
What impact that would actually cause in production, who knows, I can’t actually find any data of any crypto actually doing this to compare, so you’re correct, there’s no evidence to suggest this in either direction.
This is my rationale behind the proposal, its easy to understand, it’s the reason we have a unbonding period at all.
Increasing the staking lockup period will only hurt ZIL.
There’s a point to argue that the price wouldn’t be as high as it is without taking those funds out of circulation. But again, I dont have the data to show you, and no one can digest it with 100% accuracy without external influences being included on the graph.
Soon bonded zil from PP intergration will allow for staked zil to be bonded and used. So much locked bonded zils being able to interact, but instead of a 28d unbonding, they’re needing to repay the loan. This is obviously going to be longer than 14d/28d - and there are lots of users of existing defi that are leveraging similar loaning mechanism. They’re fine with the loan period being longer than 28d.
Tezos and Cardano both have 0 days lockup periods and they have much bigger and stronger communities than Zilliqa.
Again, this is subjective.What do you define as a community? How can this be compared and valued?
Crypto Twitter is undeniably a big community.
XTZ : 93k (Jun 16)
ADA : 306k (Jan 17)
ZIL : 170k (Jun 17)
And zil looks to be holding up actually very nicely, and growing ontop of these numbers.
(irrelevent) I would argue that Polkadot has a better community than XTZ and ADA combined. Because of its community IDO polkastarter projects ectect. That has a longer unbonding period and market cap, and its community is thriving as they have more to offer than just staking. Surely the point about having more to do in the ecosphere drives the price more than the unbonding period like you’ve mentioned yourself. Zil is growing really quick into Q2 and beyond, so shouldn’t cause an issue then according to your price stability table.
Finally, I don’t see what your issue is with the unbonding being higher actually is.
You say that 0d unbonding helps investors, but fail to also show any workings of this. apart from “the price would certainly be further up ahead that it presently is.” We’ve demonstrated that many different models fit many different investors. Again, it’s subjective to say what an investor would do.
But we’ll have to agree to disagree. We should open up the floor to other commentors, but if you want to talk about this some more (civilly, please) please reach out via forum dm, more than happy to have a constructive conversation with you.