I believe the APY should be adequate, I mean nothing off the charts like a 40%+ APY. In order to preserve capital for the upcoming developing stages.
Looking at other projects staking APY and length of staking,3-4 months of rewards seems good. Also,by that time we should have a V1 rolled out.
I think we should always have the ability to stake our ZKP. Do staking periods have to be a fixed duration of time?
I feel the main focus here should be a seamless continuity from Advanced staking to Private staking…having a systematic increase in APY/APR from classic to adv to Private will also help incentivise holding…the PRPs are a brilliant tool for the same…I really hope something similar is designed for Private staking…as that’s the one that’s gonna last till the remaining ZKP supply dries out
One change thas has been applied to the Advanced Staking infrastructure is to allow for future staking programs by creating new terms if needed. This is very important regarding the continuity of the program itself.
I also think the advanced staking period is appropriate for 3~4 months. And I agree that it is necessary for the continuity of the program to allow for future staking programs by creating new terminology where necessary.
In your opinion, Joris, what sort of time period could we be looking at between V0.5 and V1?
I’d be weary of a sentiment shift in the community if V0.5 ends, and V1 still isn’t ready to go live, so for that reason I’d hope that there would be some overlap or seamless transition. Community sentiment took a huge downturn when classic staking ended and there was no other protocol to utilise.
I think that the 4 month timeframe proposed above is an accurate estimation.
In order to ensure that the length of the program will cover the time period towards Privacy Staking, the option to allow for furture staking programs by creating new terms is optional. Such an option can be applied to prevent a scenario we saw after the ending of the Classic Staking program.
With the updated roadmap we saw on 2 March 2023 I believe we need to put this back on the table - V1 is due in Q3 - Current advanced staking closes April 7. Lets discuss this further…
in this case, we need to extend the bids until V1 is released
From the updated road map, v1 is expected by Q3, then advance staking extension will be good maybe around 4 month
this is a great idea to block a large number of zkp and thereby protect it from landfill, especially since the summer of the traditional landfill season is ahead
We will very likely share an additional update about this!
ok we are nearing the end and it seems it would stop accepting new stakes, so we need to start moving forward on this topic.
I believe the most obvious recommendation is to extend until V1 launch as was originally intended.
I would even increase the reward rate slightly - but that is just me
If the current staking period is ending (16 May 2023), let there be a new staking program. I would suggest to propose a new 4 month program which could be put up to vote as a proposal, within the next 3 weeks max hence as @ToXiC_eHC pointed out, before the current program stops accepting new stakes on Panther V0.5.1.
As this is only a configuration change, the proposal itself shouldn’t be too complex. Furthermore, the community should discuss the APR of this new program as in what will be sustainable for the protocol. In my point of view, a lower APR rate makes sense before mainnet (Panther V1.0 launch) so that there’s an incentive to look forward to as well as encouraging & attracting new users towards Panther’s mainnet launch.
Let me be the first person to comment that lowering the APR rates would not entice me to stake more so I would at the very least keep it the same.
There’s two optimal ways we can play this I think:
1.We either maintain the current APR with provision for if they run out before V1 then we agree to add more rewards for then. We can decide how many rewards once that date approaches. We can evaluate the rate in which the rewards were depleted by, and consider the current amount of stakers when deciding how many more are needed in order to maintain rewards until V1.
2.We reduce the APR which will impact how soon the rewards will deplete by, reducing the likelihood of users staking as APR is unattractive for time locked, (or increasing the likelilhood, as rewards are more scarce). This also means we wont need to “waste” rewards supply on V0.5. As the protocol rewards are better served for V1. Also, once V1 is available, depending on the reward rate offered, if more than before, it may entice users to stake again.
I also think it is best to introduce my idea; that any rewards remaining at the launch of V1 should equally be distributed amongst those who did not claim their zZKP early. I would prefer option 1 as this will mean I earn more ZKP in the end. But happy with option 2 as well
Them i will be the one who think a increase would attrack people… for shore i.c.w. Mexc
the first option, in which the current rate remains at the same level, is the most acceptable, and I like the option of distributing unrealized tokens between bet holders
Great discussion Guys…this is my opinion…although time is of the essence…I do see how (as Joris suggests) we lowering APY for now and then increasing it up again on V1 launch would incentivise new entrants to the protocol….but I also see reason in Praetorians argument that we need to find a middle ground to keep existing stackers staked as a mass unstaking, although good for temp market liquidity maybe, looks really bad for the protocol…so my suggestion is that we decide on the APY of the PRPs immediately …and increase it to a significant amount that would make up for the drop in the main APR…this way it’s a win win! What do you guys think?