Unclaimed Rewards Optimisation

@pho that’s great stuff. Could you also show the scheduled rewards apy? What I am interested in is what the APY would look like if you don’t account for the roll over reward.

I think for the discussion to continue we need to understand what APY drop we could expect if most of the roll overs is used for something else.
If APY would drop too much I would expect a good portion of investors, including me, move on to a different project.

1 Like

I also think this be because of the price drop. As less people can claim when prices are lower…

Hey,
I added a column in the above post with the rewards minus the rollover 2 weeks ago. But I’m not sure if that is very accurate. As much as I know there are other things like liquidations which influences this diff but it should be an approximation. Seems relative constant with some increasing when LINA drops the last time. There is no regression I can think of that tells me these rewards are calculated by an algorithm. I think the team adjusts the distribution slightly by market conditions but I could be wrong here, because of the mentioned liquidations and maybe other things where I have no insight. Manual adjustments could be a good thing IMO!
Hope the data helps everyone to see, that everything works absolutely correct and fair / reasonable so far! The data looks abolutely legit to me.
Best regards!

Our holders checked the estimate Now we want to feedback official data from the team. For our vote

@pho thank you for adding that data.
Based on that information I estimated the APY. To calculate the APY I used a simple calculation based on my staked balance and total rewards received in each period.

Based on that information it looks as if the scheduled APY is around 50-55% for the last couple of periods. It is not clear to me why it is decreasing and I would suggest having the LINA team disclose the reward schedule. Further, I think if all the unscheduled rewards (rollovers) are removed APY would likely be too low for many investors. I think I might be even better of staking at gate.io or other staking pools available.

I am in favour of doing something with the rollover rewards however I would make sure that APY can not be less than 75% at the lowest. As such only rewards in excess of that should be used for burning etc.

Period Scheduled Reward APY Unscheduled Reward APY Total APY
40 39.54% 7.62% 47.15%
41 59.77% 10.34% 70.11%
42 61.81% 8.73% 70.54%
43 60.95% 8.47% 69.42%
44 65.10% 10.14% 75.25%
45 60.26% 6.30% 66.56%
46 74.34% 8.12% 82.46%
47 78.84% 11.83% 90.67%
48 81.36% 13.24% 94.60%
49 72.15% 15.62% 87.77%
50 83.85% 21.20% 105.05%
51 95.63% 35.47% 131.10%
52 89.58% 22.90% 112.49%
53 82.08% 26.17% 108.25%
54 79.56% 21.54% 101.10%
55 80.72% 23.53% 104.25%
56 82.60% 39.89% 122.49%
57 63.02% 28.93% 91.95%
58 62.63% 34.37% 97.01%
59 60.79% 46.18% 106.97%
60 49.73% 40.61% 90.34%
61 55.44% 52.66% 108.10%
62 35.61% 36.71% 72.32%
63 56.64% 62.93% 119.57%
64 0.00% 56.43% 56.43%
65 115.43% 62.72% 178.15%
66 58.13% 18.01% 76.15%
67 57.16% 78.41% 135.58%
68 57.91% 21.09% 79.00%
5 Likes

Thanks Crumbi, for taking the time to do this, good job.

1 Like

Great decision, let’s implement it

2 Likes

I think we could bring this to a vote with the following voting structure

Path A) Reallocate all rollover rewards for another purpose, including additional payout to stakers. Distribution of rollover rewards to burning, DAO, stakers etc to be determined in a subsequent vote.
Path B) Only use Rewards in excess of 75% APY for another purpose, no additional payout to stakers
Path C) Only use Rewards in excess of 90% APY for another purpose, no additional payout to stakers
Path D) Only use Rewards in excess of 100% APY for another purpose, no additional payout to stakers
Path E) Only use Rewards in excess of 60% APY for another purpose, no additional payout to stakers

For Paths B, C, D and E the distribution of rollover rewards to burning, DAO etc to be determined in a subsequent vote. For these paths, there would be no additional payout to stakers as this proposal already includes a rollover allocation through the enforcement of a MAX APY. However, it should be noted that this proposal could also result in a reduction of the scheduled rewards as can be seen in my previous post that shows the historical APYs.

Also we would need to clear out how APY is calculated.

1 Like

actually thinking about it again perhaps a simpler voting structure should be used in the first step

Path A) Reallocate all rollover rewards for another purpose, including additional payout to stakers. Distribution of rollover rewards to burning, DAO, stakers etc to be determined in a subsequent vote.
Path B) Only use Rewards in excess of specific APY for another purpose, no additional payout to stakers
Path C) Do not change the reward system

@Captain_Trips_Linear Council members could you please comment on the next steps here?

2 Likes

i’m just a single member of the LC, so i only speak for myself. i am not in favor of changing the unclaimed rewards structure

@Captain_Trips_Linear Thank you for your feedback.
I think because there have been various comments around that we should at least bring it to a vote.

If people vote in favour of not changing the reward structure then so be it…

Can we add this to a vote?

2 Likes

i won’t support something that i am not in favor of. if you have 500k LINA then you can issue a snapshot. if you don’t, then you need to find someone who supports it.

please be aware that the linear council reserves the right to veto anything passed by the community that could be seen as detrimental to the protocol. i am convinced that changing the rewards structure fits that classification, so i would suggest that whomever is drafting the finalized snapshot think long and hard about what they are proposing. changing the rewards structure for our most loyal and active users is not something i take lightly

1 Like

I appreciate that you are expressing your opinion but I would have thought that you do not need to support it to issue the snapshot.

Overall, based on all the feedback received there is a clear interest of the community to conclude on that topic. I would assume that you as a council member would follow up on the points that are brought forward by the community. Instead you try to follow your own interest by threatening or implying that you will Veto any proposal?

Because of the interest accross the community it should be taken for a vote.

2 Likes

@CK_Linear_Council
@Ant
@semi1993
@Sam
@JPR

What are your views on that topic? Would be great to collect the views of all members of the council.

1 Like

I have to say that I have been thinking about this a lot.
The claiming/ Reward system is good. But of course not perfect. I believe that we still can make changes to optimize the system.
I started one of the first propositions considering the claiming system.
https://forum.linear.finance/t/distribution-of-rewards-claiming-system-by-semi1993/137/25

I still feel that there is lot of interest from the community about those topics and a lot has been written about this on the Forum.
However it is not easy as it is a big step in a certain direction and we would not like to make changes about the claiming/ reward system everyweek :slight_smile: Otherwise it would become very complicated.

I personally wouldn’t close this chapter. But we should need to bring up a certain vision with a large support base within the community. Otherwise it does not make sence to bring this up for voting

Thanks @Crumbi for pursuing this interest. I agree that if this is something the community feels strongly about it does warrant a vote, even if to be voted against. I like your tenacity, also the path options you give above.
For what its worth here’s what I think; I was at first very much in favour of using these unclaimed rewards as, to me, it seemed like a win win situation, that of using excess/unclaimed rewards rather than DAO funds directly and using them to better the protocol. In particular I would use funds to secure peg and liquidity of the BUSD/ LUSD pool on PCS.
That being said, the point was brought up that we really needed some better understanding of the mechanics of this proposal, the implications both long and short term. for example how much do we actually need to secure peg? Probably not that much right now so wouldn’t it be better to just use DAO funds directly and not impinge on stakers rewards?
I also felt that this topic lost a bit of momentum as other threads were started, and personally I was focussed more on partnerships and exchange listings. Bettering the exchange still remains my top priority.
In conclusion I could probably be persuaded more in favour of using unclaimed rewards, as you suggest, over a certain APY, probably 90% and use to secure peg either directly or if we are at peg then to add liquidity and thus strengthen peg.
Can I ask why you are so in favour of this vote?

Also for what its worth, I think some conversations have gotten a little heated, may I remind us all, me included, that we are all working towards the same goals here, debate and discussion is necessary in a DAO so lets work together. Sometimes a Vote may be required to separate the wheat from the chaff!
Peace all x

2 Likes

personnaly I gave up, you should do the same @Crumbi

Of course not :slight_smile: Why would you give up on what you believe in.
Please do not forget that DAO is only live for around 3-4 months.
I think we should be proud on the evolution we have made.
We are still largely in a discovery phase! However the more we are looking into different topics, the more we as a community will learn about this ecosystem , the more we will be able to achieve!
As @JPR mentioned, we are all connected through the linear finance protocol and I am 100% sure that everyone here would benefit from a better/ stronger platform. All discussions are important in this process :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Unfortunately I can not give up at this point.
I think topics should be closed out and not simply ignored.

If we just ignore this topic then people that commented on that in favour for changing the reward system will feel ignored. Also if this topic is closed out properly, e.g. in favour of not changing the reward system then you can refer to it as being already discussed and voted on whenever it comes up again.

If I give up on this now, I will leave the project.

4 Likes

The 90% is based on the historical analysis I had posted. High enough not to cap scheduled reward.

3 Likes