[GIP] Bring Full Staking to the GoChain Network about gips HOT 61 CLOSED

I think this is a pretty good idea, thanks for submitting. One comment:

What if there were no max so it wouldn't be capped at 15%? It would just be split to all stakers based on their percentage of the total staked pool. The returns would fluctuate (the more staked, you get less return, if less is staked, you get more return), but it would allow more people to stake and be more fluid.

from gips.

As I think about this, could have the minimum amount to be staked as a function of the total already staked. In other words, if you want a piece of the pie, you have to be willing to truly invest in GoChain. Something like this:

Total staked.............................Minimum staking amount 100,000....................................100 1,000,000.................................1,000 10,000,000...............................10,000 100,000,000.............................100,000

Have the minimum required to stake be "elastic" as a function of the total currently staked. This way, there's no limit but the total staked self regulates and those who truly want to be a part will have to invest. Only problem is, it becomes cost prohibitive as the value of Go increases... but is that really a bad thing?

I actually really like that idea. What do you guys think?

I love this!

from gips.

This is a very interesting idea.

from gips.

Why not just have another round of staking like the previous one, 3 % wasn't it? Allowing anyone to stake another part of their bag and bring new stackers as well. If someone has already staked the max 1000000 they should be able to stake up to the same again in the new round. I would be surprised if the nodes gave up half their rewards in this vote, and it would give them less incentive to push the project on.

Because the current staking is limited and in truth, a bit clunky. It's not automatic. This allows anyone, anywhere to stake at anytime. Not to mention, the current staking rewards are being paid out of the GoChain nodes. They had to set aside a certain amount of Go to do this and there's no guarantee they have enough to support another round. What's more, eventually, when the network has 50 nodes, GoChain most likely won't have a node AND will be getting smaller rewards themselves, thus, even the current staking is not sustainable in the long run. Having staking paid directly from rewards is the only way to truly ensure it's long lasting.

As for the validators receiving half of their rewards, yes this is a concern, but in truth, the value of Go would simply need to double (which we've seen can happen with a spike in trading volume) for them to earn the same dollar amount they're earning now. What's more, for the reasons I outlined up above, I actually think it would be in their interest to give up half of their rewards if it brings some much needed traffic to the network as well as price action.

As I stated before, outside of speculation, there's no incentive to holding Go. This immediately creates incentive and adds a new dimension to the appeal and thus use of the network. There would be immediate demand which I would expect to more than double the value of Go in a very short amount of time.

from gips.

I think this is a pretty good idea, thanks for submitting. One comment:

What if there were no max so it wouldn't be capped at 15%? It would just be split to all stakers based on their percentage of the total staked pool. The returns would fluctuate (the more staked, you get less return, if less is staked, you get more return), but it would allow more people to stake and be more fluid.

So I actually ran some calculations and the returns really start to get abysmal after a certain point, hence the 15% limitation. My goal was to yield a rate that was clearly better than typical returns, so that there is real incentive. I have a google sheet that you can look at. If you send me your email, I can add you so you can edit it and see how changing the percentage effects the returns. Even allowing 25% of total supply to be staked reduces the ROI to less than 8%.

I also checked on Ethereum, and they're only allowing up to 10M to be staked out of 118M in circulation, which is about 8%, so we're being quite generous here by allowing 15%.

Admittedly though, this brings other challenges:

• What happens when 15% is staked? Do the rewards get added to the staking pool or sent another wallet that belongs to individual users?
• It can be argued that, allowing unlimited staking would create more demand, because it would mean users would need to purchase more Go to get a higher percentage. However, when looking at the sheet below, if 50% is allowed to be staked, even a 1M Go investment would only yield 3.83%.

I do think there should be some limits somewhere to keep the staking total limited, be it a hard cap, or a minimum investment (maybe 100,000 Go minimum to stake?). This way, the total staked doesn't climb too easily and reduce the returns too low.

As I think about this, could have the minimum amount to be staked as a function of the total already staked. In other words, if you want a piece of the pie, you have to be willing to truly invest in GoChain. Something like this:

Total staked.............................Minimum staking amount
100,000....................................100
1,000,000.................................1,000
10,000,000...............................10,000
100,000,000.............................100,000

Have the minimum required to stake be "elastic" as a function of the total currently staked. This way, there's no limit but the total staked self regulates and those who truly want to be a part will have to invest. Only problem is, it becomes cost prohibitive as the value of Go increases... but is that really a bad thing?

I actually really like that idea. What do you guys think?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T8Iw3pr-yjgCAKJxagU5oUuk9VsmM4TInCA7eRyPMiA/edit?usp=sharing

from gips.

OK the aim is to bring in more people and tie up the most GO it shouldn't be limited at all.
No ma ximum or minimum amount staked by the stakes and no limit on the percentage of the total supply.
The size of the staking pool and the resulting returns would find a natural level.
To help reduce volatility it would help if there was a minimum time frame to have to Go staked.
Maybe you could have the first full one month you stake your Go as a probationary period that you don't receive a reward for.
If you pull out you have to serve another full month before starting to get rewards again.

from gips.

OK the aim is to bring in more people and tie up the most GO it shouldn't be limited at all. No ma ximum or minimum amount staked by the stakes and no limit on the percentage of the total supply. The size of the staking pool and the resulting returns would find a natural level. To help reduce volatility it would help if there was a minimum time frame to have to Go staked. Maybe you could have the first full one month you stake your Go as a probationary period that you don't receive a reward for. If you pull out you have to serve another full month before starting to get rewards again.

You should really look at the sheet I posted up above.

The primary goal here is give holders an incentive for holding Go.

The GoChain Foundation is currently offering 8.1% return. To maintain that rate, no more than about 25% of the total supply can be staked. Further, there must be a minimum to stake because the fees just to payout will actually eat into the rewards if the rewards are too small.

There has to be a limit somewhere so that the incentive isn't nullified. Once returns fall below 5%, I do not think there is enough incentive for users to purchase Go and participate. This would mean, the only way to get a decent return is for others to pull their investment out of the staking pool. This then becomes a game of chicken of users not wanting to pull their investment out and miss out on future rewards as they're hoping others will pull out before them to increase the ROI.

And in truth, I truly believe that volatility would be a good thing. Go has been historically stable as far as price action goes. If you allow users to invest and pull out Go whenever they feel like, this will create more network activity, more fee burning, and more volatility in the markets as users sell their rewards and others buy in to join the staking.

I chose the numbers up above such that the ROI is substantial enough to get people's attention. With no limit in place, only the early users will benefit until the returns drop to low levels, and then there would be no new interest in purchasing Go.

The elastic limits I've proposed create real incentive. With roughly 100,000,000 Go staked, the return is above 20%, which is quite substantial. And at current prices, 100,000 to invest would be roughly $4000. That 100,000 additional Go reduces the rate of return for everyone staking BUT it forces a user to actually invest in Go.

This doesn't account for the fact that roughly 9% of the total supply is taken out of circulation. If you adjust the price of Go to account for that and maintain the same mcap, that puts the price of Go to about 4.4c and the investment required to be $4400.

If 200,000,000 is staked, the return is roughly 10% and the investment required would be 200,000 Go. At current prices, that's $8,000 (a real investment). Accounting for deflation and maintaining the same market cap, puts Go's value at 4.9c and the investment would be $9800.

For comparison purposes, it costs over $140,000 to stake on Ethereum.

In other words, you can have a piece of the pie, but you have to be willing to truly invest in Go. If people don't want to put up that kind of cash, that's fine, the ones who have get greater rewards. If people do want to put up that kind of cash, that's fine too, rewards are lower but there's more demand for go AND less Go in circulation, which is also great.

Making the barrier of entry too low quickly voids the benefit of doing it at all.

from gips.

I think this is a pretty good idea, thanks for submitting. One comment:

What if there were no max so it wouldn't be capped at 15%? It would just be split to all stakers based on their percentage of the total staked pool. The returns would fluctuate (the more staked, you get less return, if less is staked, you get more return), but it would allow more people to stake and be more fluid.

Thats a great idea, there shouldn't be a max. Would be cool if people can register for staking directly from gochain.io.

@treeder when can we have this available? The whole governance process has usually been super slow, with trying to get 50 likes etc, would be awesome if we can have this available sometime soon and maybe not go through that whole process for this proposal.

from gips.

I'd say 1,000 Go or .1% of the current staking pool, whichever is greater.

It would quickly transition to .1% of the staking pool, as it would only take 1,000,000 Go to be staked for .1% to be 1,000 Go.

And I think it's safe to say that at least 30,000,000 Go will be staked right off the bat.

I imagine the minimum that can be staked would be updated periodically... perhaps every 10 minutes or 120 blocks. That way, a user doesn't get rejected trying to stake the minimum and the minimum changes while submitting because the total increased.

from gips.

I think a minimum is required, even if just to reduce the cost of distributions. I'm not sure what I think about an adjusting minimum though, that seems to give the richer folks an advantage.

What would be the optimal minimum? 100 would be too small I think and not justify the cost (only $4 staked). 1000 probably too small. 10,000 ($400) feels like a good amount that's both inclusive and not too wasteful.

Imo 10,000 would be way too low, then the return will only be a few percent in no time and there's no point in doing this. It should be adjustable, we want people to buy more go and invest more. It's not about giving people advantage its about giving people incentive to truly invest in go.

from gips.

Why not just have another round of staking like the previous one, 3 % wasn't it? Allowing anyone to stake another part of their bag and bring new stackers as well.
If someone has already staked the max 1000000 they should be able to stake up to the same again in the new round.
I would be surprised if the nodes gave up half their rewards in this vote, and it would give them less incentive to push the project on.

from gips.

I think 50,000 go should be minimum and let's keep the current staking rules. Returns are paid to the same wallet and nothing can be withdrawn.

from gips.

👍

from gips.

I've updated the specifications. I've removed the 1M Go per wallet minimum and INCREASED the elastic minimum percentage to .5%.

Why? Because we can reduce it in the future with a new vote (it would be a hard sell to increase it). This will be necessary when the price of Go increases. But for now, have it high so the total doesn't balloon too easy.

At current prices, that puts a minimum investment after 10% is staked at around $20,000. Yes, this is high, but that's because a large amount of Go is commanded by this amount due to the current low price. At current prices, $20,000 commands 500,000 Go, which is quite a lot. However, when Go is $1/Go, that same $20,000 only commands 20,000 Go which won't have as large of an impact on the total staked as 500,000.

from gips.

There should be a minimum so the returns don't get too low.

from gips.

What would you set as a minimum, I suppose a low return on a small investment wouldn't interest many people anyway.
That said it may well be important to the low income workers in the world Gochain is hoping to help with banking services at some point.

from gips.

What would you set as a minimum, I suppose a low return on a small investment wouldn't interest many people anyway. That said it may well be important to the low income workers in the world Gochain is hoping to help with banking services at some point.

This would be a completely different mechanism. What's being proposed here is using the block rewards to pay Go holders.

Banking solutions would pay holders via interest payments.

from gips.

OK

from gips.

What do you propose as a minimum?

from gips.

I think a minimum is required, even if just to reduce the cost of distributions. I'm not sure what I think about an adjusting minimum though, that seems to give the richer folks an advantage.

What would be the optimal minimum? 100 would be too small I think and not justify the cost (only $4 staked). 1000 probably too small. 10,000 ($400) feels like a good amount that's both inclusive and not too wasteful.

from gips.

Great discussion btw!

from gips.

I think a minimum is required, even if just to reduce the cost of distributions. I'm not sure what I think about an adjusting minimum though, that seems to give the richer folks an advantage.
What would be the optimal minimum? 100 would be too small I think and not justify the cost (only $4 staked). 1000 probably too small. 10,000 ($400) feels like a good amount that's both inclusive and not too wasteful.

Imo 10,000 would be way too low, then the return will only be a few percent in no time and there's no point in doing this.

I agree 100% on this point. Like it or not, Go is cheap right now and so it would be VERY easy to have a large amount staked and the returns fall below 5%. My fear here is that, with the barrier of entry being too low, there would be an initial rush to join the staking, then the ROI would drop, and then the demand to buy Go would immediately vanish because the returns from staking just isn't worth it anymore.

It's not about giving people advantage its about giving people incentive to truly invest in go.

I agree here as well. Not just invest, but HOLD Go. I'm not sure how much would be staked, but at 100,000,000 Go, that yields a 20%+ return. Regardless of how much Go costs, that's enough to get people's attention. And at current prices, 100,000 Go ($4000) to get a 20% return is not bad in my eyes. And I will admit, I'm of the opinion that, in the current climate, the benefits have to be really good compared to others to bring people over... not just comparable. This needs to make people actually stop and think about whether it's worth going through the trouble to purchase Go vs shrugging it off. Those who are willing to do it will be rewarded handsomely.

I honestly don't think anything less than 10% will cut it with the way the larger crypto market is doing and how GoChain has fared thus far, and in truth, I think 15-20% is needed to have a real shot of getting NEW people's attention.

from gips.

While I'm thinking about this...

The .1% minimum staking amount becomes cost prohibitive as the value of Go increases. Should this be the case, another proposal could be made to reduce the minimum or make a flat rate based on the value of Go. For example, at $1+/Go, minimum to stake would be a flat rate like $1000 or $10,000. Or simply reduce the rate to .01%. (And if you want to get really fancy, have the minimum staking percentage be a function of the price of Go ;-), but probably easier to just vote on it).

This way, the total amount staked doesn't balloon so easily.

The current price of Go makes it really easy for the total staked to balloon to nonbeneficial levels quickly.

from gips.

I'm not convinced having a very high minimum will get a significantly higher ROI.
A 20% return will just attract bigger hitters and the staking pool will grow and ROI drop, it will always find a level that balances risk and reward relative to comparable investments.
On the other hand if it is too low much of the rewards will be wasted in paying network fees and generally running it.
A floating amount would be difficult for those investors who may drift back and forth across its boundary and lead to people feeling cheated and thus become disgruntled, we have all seen the hassle that trolls can cause on social media - key board warriors, let's not give them ammunition.
I fixed level of Go is easy to present a case for and for all to understand and accept.
I guess the consensus is between 10,000 and 100,000.
Shall we all put forward a figure and take the ball park average?

from gips.

I'm not convinced having a very high minimum will get a significantly higher ROI.

How else do you propose we pump the brakes on the total amount being staked? Because the math is clear, the rewards are no longer worth it after a certain point.

A 20% return will just attract bigger hitters and the staking pool will grow and ROI drop,

I don't see this as a bad thing because the bigger hitters will have to buy a larger portion of Go. At 100M Go staked, if they want to stake another 1M Go, they'll have to pony up $40,000 at current prices. At that point, you really have to believe in Go to put up that kind of cash.

A floating amount would be difficult for those investors who may drift back and forth across its boundary and lead to people feeling cheated and thus become disgruntled

The way I imagined this is... once you're in, you're in. So if you got in early with only 5,000 Go and the minimum becomes much greater than that, you will still get your rewards based on your 5,000 Go. It's just that, if you pull it out, you'll have to meet the minimum to get back in.

I fixed level of Go is easy to present a case for and for all to understand and accept.

I'm still in favor of my "elastic" approach but, if you present a fixed level... how do you propose we prevent ROI dropping to untenable levels?

Keep in mind, GoChain is lagging behind the larger crypto ecosystem, so I REALLY think it's important that the incentive actually stands out. I do not think this will succeed otherwise. Harsh, but I truly believe this.

from gips.

As long as no one gets bumped out of the scheme that would be OK.
How about a minimum of 20,000 Go or the equivalent percentage at current prices?
No maximum on how much anyone can stake.
Once you are in you are in for as long as you keep your Go in the scheme.
Should rewards be paid into the same Wallet or a different one?
I suppose max supply will increase as the rewards are generated so it wouldn't matter to the proportion of the Pool to overall supply.
Can the rewards be taken out without affecting membership of the scheme?
Could rewards be paid into a different wallet?

from gips.

👍

from gips.

So here's how I imagine it, fully fleshed out:

• Max amount to be staked per wallet: 1M Go
• Staking period: 7 days (yes this is short, but allows more activity on the network and volatility in the markets)
• Go would have to be submitted to a staking address (this might be a single address for everyone, or a unique address for each wallet)
• Pre-stake period: For limited time, say 3-7 days, allow users to submit their Go for staking with a set minimum (TBD, 5,000? 10,000? 20,000? 50,000?). The "elastic" minimum would not be active during this stage. Cap the max amount that can be staked during this stage (TBD, 30M? 50M? 100M?).
• Once the pre-stake period is complete, staking rewards begin and the elastic minimum takes affect (minimum that can be staked is .1% of the total currently staked).
• The elastic minimum to be staked would update at a fixed interval (say ~10 minutes (120 blocks)). This is to prevent a user from not being able to stake the minimum because it changed while it was being submitted.
• Users are able to pull out any amount of their Go at any time. The rest will continue to earn rewards.
• Only the amount that remained staked during the entire payout period will be rewarded. Meaning, if you staked 5000 Go and pull out 1000 before the end of the payout period, you'll only be rewarded for the 4000 Go. This is also true for adding to your staked amount.
• If a user wants to ADD to their position, they have to add the difference between the elastic minimum and their current amount staked. Meaning, if the elastic minimum is currently 50,000 Go and they have 10,000 Go currently staked, they would have to add at least 40,000 Go to add to their position to meet the minimum. They are free to add as much Go as they would like up to 1M staked for their wallet
• Staking rewards are automatically added to a wallet's staked amount
• Wallets over 1M Go (due to rewards) are prohibited from adding to their position. A user would have to stake with a new wallet and the current minimum.

I think that covers most aspects of things. What do you guys think?

from gips.

There shouldn't be any max amount. Also should be monthly.

from gips.

There shouldn't be any max amount. Also should be monthly.

The max is only during the pre-stake period.

Or are you talking about the 1M max per wallet?

Why monthly vs weekly?

from gips.

There shouldn't be any limitations on max, why only 1 million per wallet? makes no sense. Also doing pre-stake would just complicate things. Monthly so people consider this more long term, we want them to lock up their coins for years and not see it as a fun short term thing to do.

from gips.

The reason for the 1M max is so that users would have to add a larger position to stake more Go vs throwing in a little here and there.

And the pre-stake is to give everyone a chance to come in and stake before the minimum gets large.

I understand your reasoning for doing it monthly. However, the reason I suggest weekly is so there is more network activity and market volatility. My concern is that, paying it out monthly, we'll get some new activity each month and then things will go quiet. Monthly rewards only benefit long term holders. Doing it weekly doesn't hurt long term holders and allows people to jump in and out.

And yes, I do want people to jump in out. Why? Because it will bring some much needed activity to the network (and more fee burning) as well as volatility/price action in the markets. Further, it exposes users to the speed and affordability of GoChain (that surprisingly so many still don't know about... seriously, people actually think GoChain is slow).

As a counter, what is the harm of doing it weekly? Long term users simply don't take their Go out.

I see this as an opportunity to hit many bases and thus, trying to hit as many as possible here.

from gips.

Imo it should be as simple as possible. No max requirements or wallet size restrictions, a reasonable minimum requirement like 50,000 Go, no automatic adjustments that nobody will understand and the returns can be daily for all that I care, but I would prefer monthly as I think that will give a more long term feeling to it.

from gips.

Imo it should be as simple as possible. No max requirements or wallet size restrictions, a reasonable minimum requirement like 50,000 Go, no automatic adjustments that nobody will understand and the returns can be daily for all that I care, but I would prefer monthly as I think that will give a more long term feeling to it.

.1% of total supply isn't difficult to understand.

But aside that... how do you prevent the total amount being staked from ballooning?

That is a critical question that cannot be ignored.

from gips.

Imo it should be as simple as possible. No max requirements or wallet size restrictions, a reasonable minimum requirement like 50,000 Go, no automatic adjustments that nobody will understand and the returns can be daily for all that I care, but I would prefer monthly as I think that will give a more long term feeling to it.

.1% of total supply isn't difficult to understand.

But aside that... how do you prevent the total amount being staked from ballooning?

That is a critical question that cannot be ignored.

It will balloon anyways, even at 0.1% adjustable you'll just have bigger players adding more to the stalking pool. Doesn't matter if the minimum is 50k Go or 500k Go it will still balloon until the market doesn't find the return attractive anymore and stop putting more Go into the stalking pool.

from gips.

The minimum does matter as the price of Go increases. Go is cheap right now, so 500,000 Go is only about $20,000.

But once the value of Go increases, the number of people able to put up 500,000 Go drops.

There has to be some sort of mechanism to deter the total staked from getting too large. Frankly, after about 200M Go is staked, the returns drop to 10%. At that point though, I would imagine the price of Go to have increased significantly.

from gips.

I'm of the opinion that a minimum doesn't really matter (other than not being too small that it costs too much) and neither does a maximum. The rate that people are happy with will work itself out. If too much gets staked and the rate goes down, people will remove some, and vice versa. Also, the maximum is easily cheated by just creating multiple accounts so it adds complexity for very little benefit. The best case scenario is people being happy with a decent, but not huge return, because that means more is being staked. The more staked, the better for everyone.

from gips.

I agree, let's have a cost effective minimum and no maximum.
Is weekly or monthly payout better?

from gips.

I'm of the opinion that a minimum doesn't really matter (other than not being too small that it costs too much) and neither does a maximum. The rate that people are happy with will work itself out. If too much gets staked and the rate goes down, people will remove some, and vice versa. Also, the maximum is easily cheated by just creating multiple accounts so it adds complexity for very little benefit. The best case scenario is people being happy with a decent, but not huge return, because that means more is being staked. The more staked, the better for everyone.

I honestly feel this is a mistake. I get the sense that the goal is shifting from giving people a reason to hold Go to trying to sequester as much Go as possible to reduce the circulating supply.

With no limits in place, it would only take 438M Go for the returns to fall below 5%. At current prices, that's about $17.5M, which isn't much in the grand scheme, however, this doesn't account for an obvious price increase, so let's say it doubles, so $35M. Still not much and likely to be hit very quickly.

My fear is that there will be initial spike in demand that will drive up the price and then the staking pool will balloon quickly. Then the returns will drop to a low level and then we're back into a slightly better version of where we are today where price speculation is the main motivation for holding Go.

When the returns fall below that worthwhile threshold (whatever it is, I suspect 5%), people will dump the rewards on the markets and slowly drop the price over time. And because the price action will stabilize again due to lack of demand (since there'll be little incentive to stake when the ROI is too low) and the ROI on staking dropping to low levels, we're back in the same situation where only the most ardent supporters of GoChain are holding. Only now, they get a slight return on their investment and continue to hope for price to increase.

I understand the desire to keep things simple. But I'm also looking at the larger landscape.

GoChain needs to stand out...

But once the ROI falls below a certain threshold, it's likely to fall by the wayside once again.

And I do not want to see this happen.

I could be completely wrong about this and maybe sequestering a large amount of Go is all that's needed. But I just don't see demand being maintained once the ROI falls. What would make new people want to come to GoChain once the staking rewards drop below that threshold? Cause until something else comes along and creates new demand, we're pretty much back in the same situation we're in today but at a higher price.

I'll support whatever is decided, but I will ask...

What's the goal here?

• To give people a real incentive to hold Go

Or

• To sequester as much Go as possible.

from gips.

And let's not forget that the current staking rewards are 8.1%. As mentioned before, the trolls will come out if given the ammo. And having an ROI that's below the current 8.1% would be a prime target.

from gips.

from gips.

Why don't we start with no maximum and a minimum of 10,000 below which it become expensive to manage and have the option to close staking to new people after a one month window to join if the returns are below 8%. Somebody will always want to cash in from time to time for life's luxuries or for rainy days. When returns rise above 8% new stackers can join from a list of first come first served basis.

This is what we have now... it's just not automatic.

But even still, this is essentially putting a cap on the maximum amount that can be staked. Once roughly 25% of the current total supply is staked, rewards will be less than 8%.

We're back to square one of this discussion of putting a cap on the maximum amount that can be staked.....

from gips.

Why don't we start with no maximum and a minimum of 10,000 below which it become expensive to manage and have the option to close staking to new people after a one month window to join if the returns are below 8%. Somebody will always want to cash in from time to time for life's luxuries or for rainy days. When returns rise above 8% new stackers can join from a list of first come first served basis.

This is what we have now... it's just not automatic.

But even still, this is essentially putting a cap on the maximum amount that can be staked. Once roughly 25% of the current total supply is staked, rewards will be less than 8%.

We're back to square one of this discussion of putting a cap on the maximum amount that can be staked.....

Unfortunately this won't turn into what we had hoped for. It is what it is...

from gips.

Unfortunately this won't turn into what we had hoped for. It is what it is...

What exactly is what we hoped for?

This is why I posed the question up above:

What is the goal here?

• To give people a real incentive to hold Go

Or

• To sequester as much Go as possible.

from gips.

To give a real incentive to hold Go. It just won't happen. The only thing we can do is hope that 400 million Go staked will raise the price, but not even that I think will happen. Anyways this would need 50 likes which I don't think it will get. It was a good proposal from you though, thanks for taking the time to go through all the numbers.

from gips.

To give a real incentive to hold Go. It just won't happen. The only thing we can do is hope that 400 million Go staked will raise the price, but not even that I think will happen. Anyways this would need 50 likes which I don't think it will get. It was a good proposal from you though, thanks for taking the time to go through all the numbers.

And now you understand why I want some limits SOMEWHERE (this is what the sheet up above was for). There has to be SOME mechanism to pump the brakes on the total amount staked. There's 2 ways to do this:

1. Hard cap on the total that can be staked (this gets complicated logistically)
2. Increase the barrier of entry, hence my "elastic minimum"

If the minimum to stake is only like $200, then the ROI will drop FAST because everyone will be able to jump in. If the minimum is $10,000, well things get interesting.

Because at that point, you have to really believe in Go to invest and chances are, if you do, you've probably already been invested for a while. This would make the big players pause before deciding to jump in, but the incentive has to be there. This would slow down the total from ballooning too fast.

If you really want to make things interesting, make the minimum .5-1% of the total staked.

from gips.

To give a real incentive to hold Go. It just won't happen. The only thing we can do is hope that 400 million Go staked will raise the price, but not even that I think will happen. Anyways this would need 50 likes which I don't think it will get. It was a good proposal from you though, thanks for taking the time to go through all the numbers.

And now you understand why I want some limits SOMEWHERE (this is what the sheet up above was for). There has to be SOME mechanism to pump the brakes on the total amount staked. There's 2 ways to do this:

1. Hard cap on the total that can be staked (this gets complicated logistically)
2. Increase the barrier of entry, hence my "elastic minimum"

If the minimum to stake is only like $200, then the ROI will drop FAST because everyone will be able to jump in. If the minimum is $10,000, well things get interesting.

Because at that point, you have to really believe in Go to invest and chances are, if you do, you've probably already been invested for a while. This would make the big players pause before deciding to jump in, but the incentive has to be there. This would slow down the total from ballooning too fast.

If you really want to make things interesting, make the minimum 1% of the total staked.

If you go back to the beginning you can see I was all in for the elastic minimum but based on the other posts it just won't happen. Its going to be 10k Go minimum and its not up to you and I. I would love for it to be 5% if I could chose but I can't.

from gips.

Will there be any amendments to the original proposal or does that require a different one?

from gips.

If you go back to the beginning you can see I was all in for the elastic minimum but based on the other posts it just won't happen. Its going to be 10k Go minimum and its not up to you and I. I would love for it to be 5% if I could chose but I can't.

I honestly feel what I've proposed solves a lot of these problems. Even without the 1M Go/wallet limit, I believe it works.

The pre-stake period gives everyone a chance to jump in early
The elastic minimum pumps the brakes on the ROI getting too low

I really hope there are limits SOMEWHERE, otherwise, the incentive to HOLD Go will quickly be reduced back to price speculation

from gips.

If you go back to the beginning you can see I was all in for the elastic minimum but based on the other posts it just won't happen. Its going to be 10k Go minimum and its not up to you and I. I would love for it to be 5% if I could chose but I can't.

I honestly feel what I've proposed solves a lot of these problems. Even without the 1M Go/wallet limit, I believe it works.

The pre-stake period gives everyone a chance to jump in early The elastic minimum pumps the brakes on the ROI getting too low

I really hope there are limits SOMEWHERE, otherwise, the incentive to HOLD Go will quickly be reduced back to price speculation

I also hoped there would be a minimum that would prevent it from ballooning too soon, the points you made about raising the barrier to enter made sense to me. I would want nothing else for this to be a proposal that will actually make a difference. But based on the other posts It's not going to happen. At least you (we) tried and thats all we can do.

from gips.

This is a really neat idea and definitely would be interested in staking my Go if such an idea could come to fruition.

It's a simple concept.

Incentivise adoption.

I agree wholeheartedly - a great way to get gochain more exposed and adopted is to incentivize the process.

It could provide the momentum needed for more people to get exposed to gochain and could lead to momentum in other areas for gochain.

More exposure is only going to be healthy for future growth I feel and for greater adoption of Go.

from gips.

This is a really neat idea and definitely would be interested in staking my Go if such an idea could come to fruition.

It's a simple concept.

Incentivise adoption.

I agree wholeheartedly - a great way to get gochain more exposed and adopted is to incentivize the process.

It could provide the momentum needed for more people to get exposed to gochain and could lead to momentum in other areas for gochain.

More exposure is only going to be healthy for future growth I feel and for greater adoption of Go.

Awesome! Please spread the word so we can get to 50 votes!

from gips.

I upvoted this because i need some go for a transaction, and i can't withdraw it from my exchanges.
0xE27182Da732df48F5a9BE7879f3724Ea1D1635A6 thank you

from gips.

I upvoted this because i need some go for a transaction, and i can't withdraw it from my exchanges. 0xE27182Da732df48F5a9BE7879f3724Ea1D1635A6 thank you

That totally makes sense why you'd upvote this because of that.

from gips.

Vote Details

start_time:2022-01-07T20:00:00Z
end_time:2022-01-12T20:00:00Z
contract_address:0x2D9158087E21eAfFD6D657664DAA596F219e1EA4
choice_1:yes:0xbac03c377bF9D565b2105aAF12Afecc24907d1E7
choice_2:no:0xb59FCB378874A2973E1f8cf9bC5988aEC603F097

from gips.

Hi all, you can register for the official vote now! Please see https://github.com/gochain/gips/wiki/how_to_vote for instructions.

Please let us know if you have any issues. We'll share this with everyone else tomorrow.

from gips.

from gips.

Not yet, we'll announce soon.

from gips.

from gips.

https://gochaingo.medium.com/1ba3b4b8e69e

from gips.

Live at https://staking.gochain.io

from gips.