The explanation about both staker and dApp rewards being funneled into the loyalty reward pool was meant to simplify the explanation what will happen with those block rewards.
Personally, I find the current model suboptimal and too rigid for what we want to do, and the plan is to change it. Instead of each block issuing a predetermined amount of ASTR, we could rather define exact numbers for the dApp rewards, loyalty rewards and staker rewards. With such definition, this is just another part of the inflation.
Another point I’d emphasize is that the idea behind the voting period is to have all the stakes reset. If all nominations go to zero, there’s no criteria on which to rank dApp and give them rewards. So no one receives any rewards. Alternative would be a system where build period and voting period overlap - this would make for a very bad UX because it would be confusing whether you’re staking on the current build period or the voting period.
dApp income definitely won’t be constant, and it was never the idea to make it so. If dApp moves up the tiers, it will receive more rewards. Vice-versa if they move to a lower tier. And this will be possible on a daily basis. I would agree with you that it won’t be continuous, due to the break during the voting period. I’d also argue that this will be stable and projects will know in advance when they can earn rewards, and when they need to focus on attracting stakers.
That’s not the case, since staker rewards don’t depend on the dApp tier. If you loyally stake 10000 ASTR on a tier 1 or tier 4 dApp, your returns will be exactly the same. It’s up to you to decide who gets your vote though.
The numbers in this post were just examples, I don’t plan to update those. Instead the team and me will prepare comprehensive documentation explaining the new system. However, I will add a disclaimer to the original post with the link to the inflation discussion .
But I will add some updates here soon to cover some changes to the proposal.
Thanks for taking the time to expand on the explanations, I understand better now and will wait for the documentation to be published before asking further questions.
I appreciate your effort Dino in providing us with detailed explanations. Your insights have helped me gain a clearer understanding of the topic. Your assistance is greatly valued!
I think the undistributed rewards can be retained as a fund that can be used to invite projects or teams interested in building on the Astar Network. This fund can also support some Dapp that have been established but lack liquidity within the network , like some DEX , lending protocol .
Hello everyone, this is my first post on the forum. Before exposing myself, I tried to study tokenomics 1.0 and all the various changes in its 2.0 evolution.
I hope I can bring my support to this forum even though I’m not technical and I’m quite new to this industry. I have all the desire to learn and grow with this project and maybe become useful with my opinions. I want to say that the new perspective for dApp staking v3 seems to me to be a really big step forward which makes its entire structure and the distribution of rewards between developers and stakers much more efficient. This new mechanism will make the community of users (stakers) much more active, motivating them to stay informed and be part of the development of the various dApps.
On the other side, it will encourage dApps developers to always keep communication active and transparent to bring as many votes as possible into their project. I believe that the union of the two things leads to the creation of a very united ecosystem that brings the user very much closer with the various dApps projects and encourages even more new users to purchase ASTR tokens to be part of a system.
The tiers system compared to the current mechanism will change things a lot and will allow inflation to be better divided and to give dApps much more room for growth and motivation in trying to improve and reach higher tiers. I am proud of your work and to be part of this beautiful project!
dApp staking v3 is intended to be a big leap in improvements to our current system, this sounds great to me. It is already being discussed in another thread as well.
As everyone probably already knows, Astar launch is planed for next Monday, 12.2.2024.
Some things have changed according to the initial proposal, but it has all been shared, documented & communicated. Astar docs are the best resource if anyone’s interested in dApp staking v3 & Tokenomics 2.0 deep dive.
Essentially, all of the features that were initially planned have been implemented.
With one exception - automatic price detection, or the oracle solution.
This is also tied to more frequent tier configuration re-calculation.
In the initial proposal, this is supposed to happen once per period. But given that crypto is incredibly volatile industry, having this recalculation done once in 4 months (for Astar) just seems too rare.
I think this definitely makes sense, every 4 months is a very long time, and I would even deem potentially 2 months a long enough time and that’s half the time. I think members and people in the Crypto space are generally accustomed to quick changes last minutes and turnarounds and may even like things quicker. As long as things remain safe throughout the changes / period of time, I would have thought the quicker tier change will be seen as more suitable for the industry and to be honest maybe even more preferred.
Four months is too long in this industry. Even if a great new project comes up, I feel that 3 times a year is too few opportunities to vote on it. On the other hand, there may be a pattern of projects being abandoned. In that case, you can stop Staking, but there is one aspect of the Bonus Reward that makes it hard to stop (although you should vote with that in mind).
Also, Staker may forget to vote if there are not enough opportunities to vote.
The voting period could be halved to two months, or maybe even one month. I think it should be fluid.
I also agree with shortening the duration of 1 Period. If the specifications of dApp Staking v3 allow for an easy change of the period, I would like to see the change made after the first Period ends (perhaps mid-June?). As everyone is suggesting, I think that a duration of about 1 or 2 months for the Period would be optimal.
Just to emphasize - in my post I said nothing about shortening the period duration. That’s not on the table - and why would it be? We’re literally launching tomorrow and haven’t seen how it will work with the current parameters. Doesn’t make sense that I would make a post that we’re considering changing existing params while we still haven’t even launched yet.
My post was about how often tier configuration recalculation is done.
But regarding the Tier structure and the duration of the compensation calculation, I think I am assuming now that it is the same (3-6 months) as the dApp Staking v3 duration.
The Tier reward calculation may still be good, but if you are going to reconfigure the Tier configuration, it would be best to reset the voting as well. Otherwise, if the slots were to be reduced if they were filled, we would be talking about what to do with the dApp tiers (in which case, I think the solution would be to lower the tier of the dApps with the lowest number of votes in that tier).
Therefore, I am of the opinion that if the calculation period for the tier structure is to be shortened, the Period should also be shortened.
However, as you say, it is certainly something that has not yet been launched, so there is no need to consider changing it, but I think it is necessary to observe the progress as a matter of concern. This is why I am raising it. I don’t think that is much different than talking about how often the hierarchical structure should be recalculated.
I now think the tier configuration thing is about the number of slots, tier thresholds, and amount of rewards. My apologies if I have misunderstood.
.
)
