Lets discuss what incentives should be availble for Testnet for V1?
Maybe 500,000 ZKP distributed between V1 Testnet participants, can it be beneficial?
What will be available on testnet, single sided farm, pools, dusl sided farms and which assets will be allowed to use?
The question ofcourse is what to incentivise for?
- Does mere participation constitute a reward of some sorts?
- Does finding a valid bug and filing a bug report qualify for a reward?
- What about someone who spends hours testing but does not find a bug?
Generally speaking and what is common with other projects as well, there are two categories
Bug Bounty : This is mainly to capture serious issues which are not commonly found by regular tests. More experienced Devs / hackers will participate in this program. As per Panther tokenomics and vesting schedule, 2.5M is allocated to Foundation - Bug Bounty program. I will suggest to launch this program starting from V1-TestNet and will continue to Mainnet with different rewards depending on severity of bug found.
Incentivized Test Net : Since V1 is the first major launch, and given there is a lot of test scenarios and features - It make sense to incentivize community for testing and reporting bugs. The reward is not going to be based on bugs found but actually using the application and performing all the functionality available. It will be a simulation of Mainnet… so essentially, a User, while performing test will collect testPRP’s and then can convert those test PRP’s to “testZKP”. And that “tZKP” can be used as token to redeem for production tokens ( which are allocated for Incentivized Test Net purposes). This is one of the idea, which is dencetralized, rewards allocation will be pre-approved and moved to a pool and rewarding mechanism can be automated as well. That ways, it doesn’t leave any room for errors/delays/manual intervention. This is one of the ideas we have been thinking but open for further suggestion and discussion here. It would be good to see more participation on this topic and try to come to a consensus by end of this week.
I find this idea very interesting and support it in every way.
I have been trying to get my head around this and this is a great idea.
Fully support it.
which also means that;
we will need to whitelist atleast one but may be two other test tokens to be used in Panther in addition to ‘tZKP’ with limited supplies. And the distribution of those test tokens will need to follow a mechanism to restrict someone minting a lot of test tokens to use within the application and hence get more rewards. Panther faucet can be used with some restrictions put in place for those test tokens.
Will we be able to send and receive test z-tokens? I mean, we should be able to swap but also send test z-tokens in p2p.
If you need a swapper, count me in
I’d encourage the whole community to approve the proposed approached.
Sounds like a great plan and I would support that. Any ideas of what t-tokens we would be using? Also agree with a cap, so one is not over incentivize, letting some room for other that want to test as well. Very exciting!!
Sounds good to me. I think to get maximum buy in from the community, rewards shouldn’t be based on errors/bugs found - rather, base it on participation.
Great idea, fully supported
Point 1 sounds good!
Regarding point 2, I have some concerns around security & scalability
Can it be exploited by malicious actors at all? I.e. can someone not automate the following: creating 100s of unique test wallets → call ZKP smart contracts → get testPRPs and then tZKP → exchange tZKP for actual ZKP?
What ZKP allocation & amount is considered for the reward pool? And given the current low liquidity of ZKP on exchanges - is it in the community’s interest to reward people with actual ZKP at this point in time? That could just add additional sell pressure onto the market.
How would this incentivised testnet work for future releases, or is it just for v1?
If the former, do you foresee any potential problems, for example, will the ZKP reward pool ever need to get topped up? What do you anticipate the burn rate to be for this pool as well?
There are few ways to handle this. The intention is to be able to test all the cases and rewards (tPRP) be issued for that. what does this means; a) More rewards for transactions than just for depositing and keeping assets in the pool. b) Relative value of token (weight) adjustment so tzkp gets more rewards than TestToken-A and TestToken-B. This is similar to the fact that Eth will accrue more rewards than BAT for e.g.
the amount is up for discussion, anything between 1 - 2 M might be a good number but it’s also upto Foundation to approve. You’re correct about the sell pressure but i am not sure if the Protocol can issue rewards in any other form. This is also about communication and education as ZKP is the driver for different fees payment within the protocol so users getting rewards in ZKP will be able to use them to do real DeFi activity on Mainnet. This is a rather good way than having to buy ZKP to start using the protocol.
This is for V1. Every release can potentially have its own test plans but ofcourse some technical components can be re-used like the Reward pool etc…
I would like to make the suggestions to allow incentives only for existing members and not for airdrop hunters.
the incentive is for Testers / for performing real testing and reporting any issues or bugs found to the Dev team
Hi @onblock - am I correct in assuming that the very first ‘test’ would be some form of KYC which should in theory be preventing airdrop farming etc in anycase?
The team is working on details around test stages and timelines and will share soon but here’s the snippet; KYC is Stage 1 as you see below. i dont think there is scope for airdrop farming.
|Stage3|Deposit, 2nd zAsset and wallet cold star|
|Stage4|Intra-MASP transfers, and messages|
|Stage5|“Taxi” and Transactions via Bundlers|
|Stage6|Withdrawals, basic disclosures, and zAccount renewal|
|Stage7|DeFi Swap, advanced disclosures, more supported assets|
|Stage8|zTrade, migration from v0.5, involuntary disclosures|
it doesn’t sound bad, we definitely need to reward the community, why do we need extra people in the test as airborne hunters
Hi guys. In my humble opinion, technical support, bug tracking and all that is, yes, of course important for the project. But it is also important to encourage “humanitarian” contributions - for example, technical writers and translators who can competently attract participants from different countries to the project.