Distributing a portion of Gamma tester allocations to early liquidity providers

General Chat CVP Tokenomics & Treasury
#1

Hi,

Preface: I was selected as a Gamma participant and plan to participate in testing. I am not an early liquidity provider.

I have been following the community’s discussion about their share of CVP on Discord for a while and agree with their concerns about the uneven distribution of rewards between testers and early liquidity providers.

Compared to Beta and Gamma testers, early liquidity providers took on more risk to bootstrap the liquidity for PowerPool and should be rewarded for their proportional risk. And while I appreciate the PowerPool team voting on Prop 1 to increase LP rewards I think Gamma testers and possibly Beta testers can do more.

So here is my proposal: Gamma testers (and Beta testers) should allocate a % of their tester rewards to early LPs (we can define “early” as prior to a certain block). The % can be voted on by current CVP holders but I believe 20%-50% would be fair.

7 Likes
#2

I’d like to distribute 10-20%. But this is not a good proposal because you should not let all people decide the token belongs to Beta and Gamma testers. Only Beta Gamma tester themselves are qualified to vote this to decide their belongings unless the rules haven’t been set yet.

2 Likes
#3

I am FOR this proposal, but with an important comment:
Only Beta and Gamma should decide

If this is possible to carry on the voting only among betas and gammas - than should be decided this way

Overall this is a better solution for the Powerpool as the circ supply will be smaller and the vesting schedule will be more aligned.

Just don’t want to be a bolshevik communist and claim “the riches” to share their wealth. This would be a big mistake.

P.S.
I am neither beta nor gamma, but LP from the day one

4 Likes
#4

I think it is possible to carry out voting for Beta and Gamma only. The governance system is the modular one, according to this article (https://medium.com/@powerpoolcvp/powerpool-q-a-4-governance-on-fire-b2f2f349fd3d). So, I think the team is able to carry out specific voting based on this idea.

1 Like
#5

I totally agree with this statement. The team has the contact information of all participants and can easily put a vote together.

#6

I’m agree with this proposal.

I think we can do it this way: ALL CVP holders decide whether Gamma testers (and Beta testers) should allocate a % of their tester rewards to early LPs or not; and the Gamma testers (and Beta testers) decide how much they would like to allocate.

2 Likes
#7

It is basically a good idea, but all these rewards should be locked. The community decided to increase rewards 10x, and what we get? A lot of them were dumped on the market and broke the chart. We need to make our LPs long-terms supporters and not just guys that mine tokens today and immediately selling them!

2 Likes
#8

I am for the proposal, but there’s obviously a conflict of interest to let only the beta & gamma testers to vote.

The whole community should vote, period.

1 Like
#9

I dont think that lPs really start claiming rewards with insane gas and dump on the market every day.
Dump is obviously triggered by future unlocks on main net (which is huge compared to current circulation).

#10

No issues with this, but if this is implemented, LPs should be subjected to the same lock-ups that Beta and Gamma testers would have been, in addition to some sort of withdrawal bonding curve.

5 Likes
#11

I am vehemently against this proposal and i havent even received any tokens yet.
What many of you are missing is that for new participants on the gamma side, this is life-changing money and their contributions could well give a multiple of what the network is currently giving them. The incentive alignment here is one of the strongest in the industry and it is best it is kept that way. Putting this to a community vote has 3 broad issues

  1. You are allowing the rich to virtue signal their way into what is right or wrong. Anyone voting for this proposal is likely to win the love of the crowds while those who say no will be not seen with respect

  2. It goes against what the initial hook was. Most gamma/beta testers on-boarded because they could own a meaningful percentage of the network .Now if you go back and say okay sirs, we reduce your cut and give to random whales that park capital with us - it is unfair to them

  3. It also sends a protocol message that the culture CVP is designed is one where whales are rewarded more than individual contributors who may well not hold any tokens currently.

I think retro-actively punishing gamma testers without realistically seeing what they bring to the table is unfair in the absence of a strong ecosystem.

#12

Great points. And I agree with the other folks who said that the beta and gamma users should be the ones voting on this because a deal is a deal. In retrospect, the rewards should be better linked to contributions of the gamma and beta users. From my perspective the tasks were “too simple” for the number of tokens rewarded, giving space for the formation of a plutocracy.

I’m following the medium posts, discord announcements, contributing as an LP and think we will find ways to make this work! Will participate in these governance discussions more actively from here on too.

1 Like
#13

Agreed with the proposal and the voting mechanism behind it. This project lost a lot of good momentum due to absurd distribution of 50k per tester. If we can agree as a community to re-distribute this allocation to LPs, I think all of us will be better off.

4 Likes
#14

I think that testers are not only testers of the interface but also contributors on backstage - product development, research, exposure to the market, etc. Let’s look their results and review them. From the first point of view it seems that they did not bad work (as we all are here at this forum, discussing cool stuff and tech), but they need to do a lot more for the project to make it solid tier-1 project.

2 Likes
#15

@vasilysumanov I would agree that they should be locked similar to the current Beta/Gamma terms.
But only if Beta/Gama’s lock ups would be extended for 1.5-3 months

Today we have to admit

  1. Even 10x increased rewards for early LP is nothing comparing to selling pressure for unlocked 5 mn alpha tokens
  2. So, I believe that to spot the dump, the alpha tokens should have been locked. But this is not possible atm
3 Likes
#16

Totally disagree.
just one question: where is the input from alpha/beta/gamma you are talking about?

This proposal is not to “rip off the richy alpha/beta/gamma”. This proposal is to make the gap more adequate which would allow to create the middle-class

2 Likes
#17

There is a significant difference between the LP rewards and Alpha tokens. Alpha testers have skin in the game from the early times and if they dump they virtually exit the project. As it was researched before, 42 Alpha still holds and ~10 of them move not many tokens. In opposite, LPs receive small amounts of tokens in many hands and are more likely to dump.

#18

Vasily, totally disagree.

52 of Alphas still hold, right? so 48 of them cashed out or almost cashed out.
This is ~50% of current circulating supply. And this is 10x+ larger volume than what is being distibuted for LPs.

So the key factor affecting the price is the Alphas selling their tokens. LPs’ sell off is tiny.

3 Likes
#19

You are so wrong. Testers get tokens for free. Lps bought it and they hold some tokens obviosly.

#20

Some of the alpha wallets can be also LPs, we need to check this out on-chain. If there are no tokens on the wallet is doesn’t mean that they cash out btw. Yes, selling pressure from Alpha is bigger but let’s check how much Alpha cashed out at these relatively low prices?