We all come to crypto for the money, but end up staying for the tech. Well I’m here for the tech and do believe that TradFi and the current legacy system is dead. So I’m here looking towards the future.
3 Likes
I would not yet call it really dead, but for sure it has no future scalability.
The thing with Crypto is simple, that with all its downs and ups, it is really the most “borderless” form of systemic financial infrastructure.
And to me that is the main catch- I can endulge in various “pay to earn” technical things, while not really being limited for the most part by in which country I am versus from which country the project is.
3 Likes
we already have the 30 day lock in for unstake, dont think a multiplier will make much of a difference. anyone staking is doing it on a long term range
1 Like
This will eventually encourage long term staking process. Someone who stake for long time should be reward more than someone who only stake to vote and unstake immediately
2 Likes
Update:
See my tweet here: x.com
2 Likes
I just think it goes against the ASR purpose. 30 days is already a long time I crypto. The purpose of ASR is to ensure we have the most active DAO in crypto which we do! I think we want to keep that and continue to grow. Increasing that may make it more complicated for onboarding new users. We want it less complicated to get more and more of the people!!! “Evil laugh”
2 Likes
Yes agreed .
I’ll admit it’s unfortunate that people miss out but you eat what you kill in life
3 Likes
Funny enough I have alternate examples for this with the same outcome. A project I worked with had created a 120 day opt-in mechanism and a different project a 60 day claim window, and guess what:
In both cases some came later and mourned and argued like no tomorrow that it is unfair and needs to be changed because they missed it.
It is really always the same, rules are given in advance and no one complains, but then when they miss it they storm the barricades. There is really no perfect solution to these things. Especially when one considers that time is of essence and progression needs to push for shorter resolutions.
I myself struggle a lot because I own hardware from 86 DePIN projects and they all do their changes, updates and time-windows I can miss. But honestly that is my problem for participating in too many, not a problem they collectively need to change to cater to me.
3 Likes
Yea I guess you will never be able to make everyone happy. There will always be someone or something that doesn’t please someone.
3 Likes
That’s unfortunately the case.
You can never make anyone happy.
But I like how Jupiter consults the community . So if there is fud, there is evidence that it’s what the community wanted
4 Likes
If you have a fixed amount of JUP allocated as rewards and you give 20% or 30% more to those who lock for 60 or 90 days then you need to take away % from the whole amount from those that only stake 30 days.This is how i understand this when there is fixed amount of JUP to be given out.
4 Likes
That’s a good point and again it take away from the premise of JUP being adopted by the masses. We don’t want exclusivity and that just adds to the complexity which would detract from bringing more in!
3 Likes
increasing the JUP rewards for LTH might be a good idea initially but this sound to me more like a PVP mindset.
We want new people to join the space and have the same possibilities as everyone else. By creating more value for LTH holders we would decrease value for STH.
Think big, think PPP
1 Like
Depends how you look at it.
1 jup = 1 jup
1 jup = 1 vote.
Having more jup equals greater voting power rather than stronger portfolio
1 Like