Hello guys, this is a proposal for a possible governance vote to allocate Environmental Impact Fund to liquidity mining in order for emissions to stay competitive for a longer timeframe.
I was exploring competition regarding emissions / circ. supply etc. & imo since it’s an effortless - no cost update, the sooner it happens the better. This is a helping hand for protocol’s tokenomics & investors that check long term viability.
P.s. Don’t tell Greta ;p
Not sure how I feel about this idea so let me push back a bit here… so the plan is to take funds that have been planned and allocated for environmental causes for years and use them instead to distribute additional rewards to liquidity providers/farmers? you’d also need to basically make changes to the agreed tokenomics that have been in place since inception. that seems to me like a very controversial change that will not go over well, not to mention morally questionable.
messing with tokenomics (or allocations) can create a dangerous precedent where trust in the tokenomics is lost as you can’t know if someone will try to change them again.
The emission schedule is planned for rewards to last over a long time, around 5-6 years currently & in my opinion remains reasonably competitive as is. I don’t see any long term benefit in changing token allocation just to give out some additional rewards. Especially when we’re talking about taking them out of funds directed to good causes.
I think a better discussion in future would be about how this impact fund will be actually used since it has been a long time it was mentioned. But just because it’s set aside for later, until better market conditions arise, does not mean we should decide to spend it to give out a bonus to liquidity providers/farmers.
IMO, the enviromental fund is just a distraction at this point. Maybe it would maybe made sense with WR at a few billion market cap, but as things stand now, it looks like it would just sink the WRT price lower and the impact on enviroment would be negligible.
I propose to vote to do not touch it for a few (4) years and revisit the topic later.
One way to achieve it might be through reallocation of EIF, but at least one concern thus far is that this approach seems exactly opposite to the values of Cardano n the DAO (including team) want to exemplify. That’s a fair shout from @ilkka .
Regarding the overarching goal, it seems to be premised on the idea that LM will remain the most effective or even the sole way to maintain or add to the community base. It’s seems possible that, under the right conditions, some of the incentives and benefits in the planned roadmap can be as effective n maybe more sustainable in the long term. (ref draft roadmap topic).
in addition to the EIF possible pathway, and if the focus remains LM reserves, are there other approaches the community can consider towards extending the estimated period? It may be good practice to consider alternatives (towards same goal) than to concentrate all effort towards EIF reallocation
While i agree with ilkka’s pov regarding tokenomics in general, i disagree when it becomes WR specific.
What i mean: WR has gone through a bridge hack, a bear market, a VL selling & sending funds to kraken (at market bottom), as of lately a mentality (fair or not) of pushing for updates through catalyst funding, which is super ok since WR received no funds compared to others & what has already been built, where whole mentality becomes problematic & leaves me wondering what will happen to WR if team won’t receive said funds (Don’t forget the VL selling thing here).
As of messing with tokenomics, yeap i agree in general, but there are not so many things you can actually do to change them, since it’s a term known before hand at WR’s documentation.
Illegal proposals
“Due to the general aim to keep the Platform and the DAO compliant to applicable laws and regulations, some proposals or their potential outcomes might be considered illegal.”
So, i believe revisiting just the environmental fund, which doesn’t actually fall under the scope of being illegal, in order to balance some pain from the past is a good shot, but in the spirit of what Legend said " to boost the appeal of the protocol to holders by providing additional incentives and benefits (through an extended liquidity mining program)." Those 3 million WRT will be there just to keep farming alive as much as possible while giving the flexibility to keep emissions-aprs competitive.
I think this aligns somewhat with the current plans with the impact fund. the plan has always been to hold off until the market conditions are deemed good. This achieves two things:
so in plain words, if we’re talking about peak bull market conditions here, the fund is able to do more while putting some of it to use should not have much of an effect on the market. I imagine it won’t all be put to use at once but there will be a more targeted and planned out strategy when it’s more relevant. I do agree that it will be some time off.
That being said I drawing out a broad plan, or agreement on when and how these funds can be put to use in future does not sound like a bad idea so there would be a better shared understanding on what to expect? but even so, this could be a topic to revisit later in 2024 or so perhaps?
yeah I’ll be honest I’m personally against messing with anything that’s already set aside in tokenomics for another purpose than liquidity rewards. but fair play to you for bringing the topic up for conversation. We can always discuss and we don’t always have to agree.
call me an optimist but I do think Wingriders has already proven that they have a long term plan to stick around with funding, having survived and kept building on top of a live product on mainnet all throughout this entire bear market. we’re starting to see some light in the end of the tunnel now for the overall markets, and it’s better days ahead for those that survived the cycle. I know these cycles can feel brutal but they don’t last forever. however it will go, Wingriders is here to stay.