26/N
Ik you’re all eagerly waiting for this, congrats if you made it this far!
@KlimaDAO 🧵part 2! Here it goes… in the next tweet.
P.S. I was today years old when I learned Twitter caps you at 25 tweets per thread. Seems fair but I have more to say 😆
Ik you’re all eagerly waiting for this, congrats if you made it this far!
@KlimaDAO 🧵part 2! Here it goes… in the next tweet.
P.S. I was today years old when I learned Twitter caps you at 25 tweets per thread. Seems fair but I have more to say 😆
27/N
We left the first thread with:
👉prem* is the lifeblood of Early POLs
👉early POLs have a market dynamic that negatively affects prem*
👉that dynamic also encourages selling when APY is higher than is sustainable
👉the same dynamic all harms the “mid-wave” adopter
We left the first thread with:
👉prem* is the lifeblood of Early POLs
👉early POLs have a market dynamic that negatively affects prem*
👉that dynamic also encourages selling when APY is higher than is sustainable
👉the same dynamic all harms the “mid-wave” adopter
28/N
So, let’s fix it!
I can almost hear all the “Finally! You wordy piece of cheese, you!” Sorry this got so long. 🤷♂️
I’ve got three items for consideration by the folk on CT with the attention span for this kinda 🧵.
🧹, 🧼, 🧽 were the exact emojis for “item” so….
So, let’s fix it!
I can almost hear all the “Finally! You wordy piece of cheese, you!” Sorry this got so long. 🤷♂️
I’ve got three items for consideration by the folk on CT with the attention span for this kinda 🧵.
🧹, 🧼, 🧽 were the exact emojis for “item” so….
29/N
🧹 first and foremost. Retool everything so that (3,3) is native, or remove barriers to (3,3).
Prime example would would be auto-staking Bonds.
idek that there should be an option to have unstaked underlying redemption to be honest.
🧹 first and foremost. Retool everything so that (3,3) is native, or remove barriers to (3,3).
Prime example would would be auto-staking Bonds.
idek that there should be an option to have unstaked underlying redemption to be honest.
30/N
I think it’s fair to say if (3,3) is the goal, then start there.
Un-staked underlying from bonds is just as easy to -1 as to +3. Staked would have to be unstaked then sold.
Staked bond proceeds could go un-redeemd if stakers want to HODL. (3,3) becomes passive.
I think it’s fair to say if (3,3) is the goal, then start there.
Un-staked underlying from bonds is just as easy to -1 as to +3. Staked would have to be unstaked then sold.
Staked bond proceeds could go un-redeemd if stakers want to HODL. (3,3) becomes passive.
31/N
The gas and redemption burden should be on the un-stakers. Right now, those who want to stake must redeem and stake.
That extra action and gas is a barrier to (3,3) where it could be passive (3,3) (and a barrier to -1 at once!).
❌Any similar active or passive barriers!
The gas and redemption burden should be on the un-stakers. Right now, those who want to stake must redeem and stake.
That extra action and gas is a barrier to (3,3) where it could be passive (3,3) (and a barrier to -1 at once!).
❌Any similar active or passive barriers!
32/N
🧼 is next, here goes:
POLs could introduce duration to bonds and to staking.
Rewarding long term holders more seems fair.
This aligns well with (3,3) and the general long term thesis behind POLs.
This also counters the unfavorable outcome in 4️⃣ of prior 🧵
🧼 is next, here goes:
POLs could introduce duration to bonds and to staking.
Rewarding long term holders more seems fair.
This aligns well with (3,3) and the general long term thesis behind POLs.
This also counters the unfavorable outcome in 4️⃣ of prior 🧵
33/N
🧼.Staking:
Lets call it “Locking” your stake.
It’s fairly simple, lock up your deposits = higher APY.
Longer duration lock = higher apy.
Incentivize (3,3) for longer.
So many ways to implement this, it’s crazy! Lol. But really a lot of options at play.
🧼.Staking:
Lets call it “Locking” your stake.
It’s fairly simple, lock up your deposits = higher APY.
Longer duration lock = higher apy.
Incentivize (3,3) for longer.
So many ways to implement this, it’s crazy! Lol. But really a lot of options at play.
34/N
DAO can fine tune yields for staking by duration to align with max (3,3).
Locked staked underlying would be removed from circulating supply for duration of lock.
This should add stability, and insight into the market (assuming locks are on chain).
DAO can fine tune yields for staking by duration to align with max (3,3).
Locked staked underlying would be removed from circulating supply for duration of lock.
This should add stability, and insight into the market (assuming locks are on chain).
35/N
🧼.Bonds:
There’s at least one way to implement duration in bonds withou 🧹, but c’mon! Haven’t I argued enough?!?
First is the vesting period. Make that a variable, and change bond capacity based on VP vs target.
I picture banded capacity ranges (1 day maybe).
🧼.Bonds:
There’s at least one way to implement duration in bonds withou 🧹, but c’mon! Haven’t I argued enough?!?
First is the vesting period. Make that a variable, and change bond capacity based on VP vs target.
I picture banded capacity ranges (1 day maybe).
36/N
Also any VP can use up the capacity for a band below it. This encourages longer VP.
If 🧹 is also implemented, then you can combine 🧹 + 🧼, or supersede VP with a “locking period.”
Imagine this: wsKLIMA, at a super steep discount with 1500 day VP and 3650 day Lock!
Also any VP can use up the capacity for a band below it. This encourages longer VP.
If 🧹 is also implemented, then you can combine 🧹 + 🧼, or supersede VP with a “locking period.”
Imagine this: wsKLIMA, at a super steep discount with 1500 day VP and 3650 day Lock!
37/N
🧼 allows for better stability, more insight into real (3,3) sentiment, and gives the DAO better tools to incentivize behaviors.
These changes alone can clear up most of the market dynamic implications in the last 🧵( 1️⃣-7️⃣ )
🧼 allows for better stability, more insight into real (3,3) sentiment, and gives the DAO better tools to incentivize behaviors.
These changes alone can clear up most of the market dynamic implications in the last 🧵( 1️⃣-7️⃣ )
38/N
Remember poor ol’ “mid-wave” buyer from before? They’d also be protected (if they really meant it and VP/ Locked TF outta their tokens).
These changes would drastically change the dynamics of Early POLs as stated above. They would also work positively for Prem*.
Remember poor ol’ “mid-wave” buyer from before? They’d also be protected (if they really meant it and VP/ Locked TF outta their tokens).
These changes would drastically change the dynamics of Early POLs as stated above. They would also work positively for Prem*.
39/N
Finally the 🧽 you’be all been waiting for!
The other thing POLs need to do is create demand for their token.
$OHM kinda has this covered already with lots in the works.
$KLIMA has some low hanging fruit that I would like to address below.
Finally the 🧽 you’be all been waiting for!
The other thing POLs need to do is create demand for their token.
$OHM kinda has this covered already with lots in the works.
$KLIMA has some low hanging fruit that I would like to address below.
40/N
I am not sure if this should be part of @KlimaDAO or a sisterDAO that does this, maybe some of both?
Basically increase demand, passive retire, show impact on NFT
I dreamt this up on Nov as a sisterDAO, so I will explain it as such.
I am not sure if this should be part of @KlimaDAO or a sisterDAO that does this, maybe some of both?
Basically increase demand, passive retire, show impact on NFT
I dreamt this up on Nov as a sisterDAO, so I will explain it as such.
41/N
I would have called it PledgeDAO, with a token PLDG or something.
PLDG would be mint/redeemable for a permanently fixed 1,000 PLDG per 1 wsKLIMA.
Mint redeem fee of 0.25% of wsK to wsK unlock contract.
1 Pledge = [1 kg carbon] * [index]
PLDG is ohm-style but redeemable
I would have called it PledgeDAO, with a token PLDG or something.
PLDG would be mint/redeemable for a permanently fixed 1,000 PLDG per 1 wsKLIMA.
Mint redeem fee of 0.25% of wsK to wsK unlock contract.
1 Pledge = [1 kg carbon] * [index]
PLDG is ohm-style but redeemable
42/N
Stake PLDG to boost APY of KLIMA (2x fee to break even though and more details below).
sPLDG is more like gOHM, or wsK, and is not able to be traded, only unstaked.
PLDG stakers also get an NFT.
Each rebase some wsK is retired on behalf on stakers, credited to NFT.
Stake PLDG to boost APY of KLIMA (2x fee to break even though and more details below).
sPLDG is more like gOHM, or wsK, and is not able to be traded, only unstaked.
PLDG stakers also get an NFT.
Each rebase some wsK is retired on behalf on stakers, credited to NFT.
43/N
Did you catch that?
Stake PLDG for one rebase and get an NFT that grows in total carbon sequestered (measured at IV) forever!
🤯🤙🌴🌳🌲
Since PLDG = wsK/1000, this would probably increase demand for wsK. I’d be into it at least.
It also creates util for wsK, nice!
Did you catch that?
Stake PLDG for one rebase and get an NFT that grows in total carbon sequestered (measured at IV) forever!
🤯🤙🌴🌳🌲
Since PLDG = wsK/1000, this would probably increase demand for wsK. I’d be into it at least.
It also creates util for wsK, nice!
44/N
Wait, didn’t I say sPLDG is boosted wsK? How?
Pledges (Bonds) attract revenue assets. Users get sPLDG in return (using 🧹+🧼 of course) at a discount.
Revenue is converted to wsK, and then added to the unlock contract.
Fraction of rebase revenue is paid out from unlock.
Wait, didn’t I say sPLDG is boosted wsK? How?
Pledges (Bonds) attract revenue assets. Users get sPLDG in return (using 🧹+🧼 of course) at a discount.
Revenue is converted to wsK, and then added to the unlock contract.
Fraction of rebase revenue is paid out from unlock.
45N
PLDG is fixed and redeemable for wsK, so there is no pressure on wsK unless people unstake then sell PLDG. I bet they’d do the same with wsK regardless.
I imagined the fraction of rebase to be 1/2, but anything less than 1 works.
PLDG is fixed and redeemable for wsK, so there is no pressure on wsK unless people unstake then sell PLDG. I bet they’d do the same with wsK regardless.
I imagined the fraction of rebase to be 1/2, but anything less than 1 works.
46/N
Then, the “principal IV” of the wsK that goes into unlock grows exponentially forever!
So, more gets earned and paid over time. That means more wsK retired recorded via NFT for stakers!
In theory wsK retired and APY on sPLDG goes up with RFV of Pledge treasury too!
Then, the “principal IV” of the wsK that goes into unlock grows exponentially forever!
So, more gets earned and paid over time. That means more wsK retired recorded via NFT for stakers!
In theory wsK retired and APY on sPLDG goes up with RFV of Pledge treasury too!
47/N
Almost there, I promise. The last bit I forgot above is that defi revenue is time locked before conversion to KLIMA (and this also deposit into wsK unlock).
This increases apy in the long term, and drives long term demand for KLIMA (by guaranteeing market buys from rev).
Almost there, I promise. The last bit I forgot above is that defi revenue is time locked before conversion to KLIMA (and this also deposit into wsK unlock).
This increases apy in the long term, and drives long term demand for KLIMA (by guaranteeing market buys from rev).
48/N
Flow chart, as promised oh so long ago.
Flow chart, as promised oh so long ago.
49/N
FIN
And thank you if you actually read all this. Brain dump over. 🥱
FIN
And thank you if you actually read all this. Brain dump over. 🥱
Last thoughts for real:
Defi strategies keep / reinvest half of revenue, rest to time unlock. Gelato uni pools for tiered concentration, fees pay up one tier (wider range). Full range pays out Rev.
“Rebase” assets (gOHM, xSUSHI, amTOKEN) work just like wsK unlock. 1/2 interest
Defi strategies keep / reinvest half of revenue, rest to time unlock. Gelato uni pools for tiered concentration, fees pay up one tier (wider range). Full range pays out Rev.
“Rebase” assets (gOHM, xSUSHI, amTOKEN) work just like wsK unlock. 1/2 interest
I should have known I’d have more “final” thoughts.
Back to the bonding mechanics:
Is there a reason that POLs do not do bond auctions?
A bond auction would allow the market to set rates (and VP / LP as described in 🧼.Bonds above).
It would also help with bots and access.
Back to the bonding mechanics:
Is there a reason that POLs do not do bond auctions?
A bond auction would allow the market to set rates (and VP / LP as described in 🧼.Bonds above).
It would also help with bots and access.
I guess in theory this could work for $OHM proposed “internal bonds” (could replace locked staking above).
I’d say that the rate setting in the vaults could (should?) be independent from the rate at auction / sale. There’s no harm (and arguable no benefit) to allow that.
I’d say that the rate setting in the vaults could (should?) be independent from the rate at auction / sale. There’s no harm (and arguable no benefit) to allow that.
For a POL with no internal bonds, (and even with them) I advocate for an illiquid locked staking mechanic.
The auctions above could be applied to the locking of coins too.
If bonding and locked-staking rates are set by the market, then there’s no need for the DAO to set policy.
The auctions above could be applied to the locking of coins too.
If bonding and locked-staking rates are set by the market, then there’s no need for the DAO to set policy.
Dropping this here for reference:
https://twitter.com/Chees_eth/status/1492688779571777538?s=20&t=Z-BT1sJkjudoF-hp3W1w1Q
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
