Instant Unstaking? A Bold Idea to Reward Long-Term Holders

Jupiter DAO ASR
,
1

For a while now, I’ve seen community members on Discord and X repeatedly asking if there’s an option to instantly unstake their JUP. In many cases, they mention emergencies as their primary reason for needing immediate access to funds.

After thinking about this for some time, I finally have an idea to share with you, mighty cats. I believe we should enable instant unstaking—but at a cost. My proposal is a 50% penalty, which would be redistributed to ASR for the same quarter in which the unstaking occurs.

For example, if Cat A has 10,000 JUP staked but decides to instantly unstake in Q2, they would receive 5,000 JUP immediately, while the remaining 5,000 JUP would go towards the ASR pool, increasing it from 50M to 50.005M JUP.

This approach benefits both sides:

  • Those who need liquidity get access to their funds instantly.
  • Long-term believers are rewarded for their commitment.

Some may argue that a 50% penalty is too steep, but it’s important to consider that:
a) Instant unstaking isn’t currently available, so this would be an entirely new option.
b) We should reward those who remain staked and support the long-term vision.

I’m happy to brainstorm with you all, so feel free to drop suggestions or constructive criticism in the comments!

Clarification: Since this post is gaining a lot of traction, I want to make something very clear: I DO NOT WANT TO CHANGE ANYTHING about the current model - I simply want to enhance it by adding an additional option.

  • If someone wants to unstake and wait 30 days, THERE WILL BE NO PENALTY - they will receive their full amount of staked JUP as usual.
  • However, I believe we should introduce an instant unstaking option for those who need liquidity urgently. This will come at a cost, as it’s a tradeoff for immediate access to funds.

I’ve seen some great suggestions, but I still believe the penalty for instant unstaking should be 50% to ensure it remains a last-resort option while protecting long-term stakers.

I love how engaged the community is - this kind of open discussion is what makes the Jupiverse special. Keep in mind, this is just a discussion for now, so I encourage everyone to share their thoughts and contribute to the conversation!

Jupiter%20Mobile
Jupiter%20Mobile1024×1024 234 KB

31 Likes
2

Hey man nice to see this topic come up again, there have been some discussions some months ago in the office hours.

Thats definitely a good approach, to have a penalty but 50% is way too much.

Same mechanisms are already implemented in the native Solana staking where you can get unstake instantly (in the background your stake is still there but they give you your sol back and take your staked position with a penalty) This is around 2-3% based on market conditions and other stuff.

10% penalty is more than enough if you ask me. Thats definitely something that could get into a vote.

Cheers :beers:

16 Likes
3

I somehow agree with this. a 50% penalty will be too much. If possible, the penalty should be in the reward to be distributed imo. around or below 10% is I think somehow reasonable. The penalty can also vary on how many times you participated in votes per quarter. If you didn’t participate on any votes, then the penalty should be much lower.

6 Likes
4

50% penalty is too steep, just my personal opinion

3 Likes
5

Some good discussion points here for sure. How about instead of allowing instant unstaking, there is somewhere to borrow against your locked $JUP?

4 Likes
6

I disagree with those suggesting 50% is too much actually. JUP are trying to encourage staking, and people to be involved long term - I agree there may be instances where users need access to funds and should have that ability, but with a cost. I actually think this is a good idea and 50% is reasonable within this context.

If you do something as low as 10%, all that will happen is the majority of JUP stakers will unstake their airdrops and sell when prices hit the highs of a bull market - this will negatively impact those that didn’t sell, and 10% isn’t enough to compensate for that imo.

5 Likes
7

I agree with this. 10% is definitely not enough, if an instant unstake option is explored. I still like being able to borrow against.

3 Likes
8

Honestly I think one month is not such a long time. I just feel bad for the person who would loose half of their funds due to temptation. Plus there is a lot of benefit to price stability too. Perhaps one could implement an unstaking tool that gives you the option to choose the amount of days one may wish to wait. Penalties would be less the more days one would wait.

I like it the way it is but that’s just me. One could gain more ASR by a borrow and lending protocol.

2 Likes
9

Brilliant idea and nice to bring this back up again especially at this stage of the bull market. Think 50% might be a huge penalty though for those who might want to unstake. It’s worth finding a balance between 10-20% for me.

2 Likes
10

Hey Konstantinos, thanks for taking the time to read and respond!

I get your point about Solana’s instant unstaking mechanism and the lower penalty they use. However, I still think 10% is way too low for JUP. Unlike SOL, which has a $100B market cap, JUP is currently at $2.5B, making it far more volatile.

If someone wants to instantly unstake, it’s almost always because they need funds urgently - which means they’ll likely sell immediately. That selling pressure can have a much bigger impact on JUP’s price compared to SOL. A 50% penaltyhelps offset that by redistributing those funds to long-term stakers, giving them an extra incentive to hold.

Right now, there’s no instant unstaking option at all, so introducing one should come with a meaningful tradeoff. If we set the penalty too low, it could encourage more short-term behavior instead of supporting the long-term vision.

4 Likes
11

Hey Opacks,

I see where you’re coming from, but I still believe a 50% penalty is fair given the context. If someone is instantly unstaking, it’s almost always because they urgently need funds and are planning to sell. That’s why I started this discussion - I think there should be an emergency option for those who desperately need access to their JUP.

Since this option doesn’t exist right now, adding it should come with a meaningful tradeoff. The 50% penalty isn’t just a deterrent - it directly benefits long-term stakers and voters, as the forfeited amount would go towards ASR and be distributed among those actively staking and participating in governance that quarter.

I get the idea of a variable penalty based on voting participation but at the end of the day, the goal is to reward commitment and long-term belief in JUP. A lower penalty could encourage more frequent unstaking, which isn’t ideal for the ecosystem.

That said, I appreciate the perspective - definitely open to more discussion on what the right balance should be!

5 Likes
12

I get that 50% feels steep, but the goal is to balance instant liquidity with long-term stability. Since this option doesn’t exist yet, it needs a meaningful tradeoff to avoid short-term dumping while rewarding committed stakers. At the same time, it gives those with real emergencies a way to access their funds.

2 Likes
13

That’s a solid suggestion and borrowing against locked $JUP could be an interesting concept. However, I think it would be very difficult to implement and would overcomplicate things unnecessarily , especially when the goal is simply to provide an emergency option for those who need liquidity.

1 Like
14

how long is long-term? 1 year 2 years 3 years?

2 Likes
15

Thanks for bringing the topic of immediate unstake to the fore again @Ferdinandoff.

I recently gave a presentation re ASR where I argued the point that DAO governance is a job.

When you approach the issue from this perspective, you may agree that typically you’d have to give notice before you leave a position, and when someone takes up a position, they do so with the understanding that it requires some sort of a commitment.

I don’t think a financial penalty should be implemented at all. It would be like docking someone’s pay for wanting to leave a job that they have completed up to a certain point.

People should be informed as best as possible when they take on the role of DAO governance that they will be remunerated well and reliably (ie. ASR w/ Guaranteed Fixed Yield) and that if they decide to leave, there will be a period of notice given (ie. 30 day unstake).

This is to preserve the integrity of the role of JUP DAO governance.

8 Likes
16

in my opinion 50% is way too much, you cant just take peoples funds away brosky,
you can penalice them with loose of ASR or something like that,
but dont touch peoples funds,
its just greedy.

3 Likes
17

Hello Ferdinandoff! Thanks for replying. Btw, I also post this on Reddit, if incase you want to check the responses from our community. You can click here.

I strongly disagree with this. Just to give some example. Some banks, offer time-deposit for your capital, you will earn interest throughout that time. And if incase, you want to immediately get your money, you will only forfeit your interest earned, and they will not deduct anything from your money.

By staking, you already giving a positive price action on the $JUP for not selling as it is locked. Penalizing stakers with a high percentage is very harsh. If possible should only apply to interest earned/ASR. and very little to capital.

1 Like
18

50% is too steep… I would rather see a way to borrow against staked JUP… would be a game changer

4 Likes
19

Hi guys, and how about 30% decreasing 1% per day (final is 0%). It’s not ok to still pay 50% when you’re like 5 days before unstake and you really need to unlock (not everything can be planned) … This would still do a good job

4 Likes
20

Good idea but bit hash IMO to slash 50% considering this is not like validators where there stake secures the system and slash like that will discourage lots of unstaking to keep the system secured always but JUP is for DAO voting.

  1. I just think this should be shortened to 1-2weeks max waiting time for withdrawal

  2. Instant withdrawal can pay 3-10% (not 50%) max which will be sent to the ASR reward as you suggested

3 Likes