Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

...

  • Staking was previously considered in FIP-21, but that approach was abandoned for the following reasons:

    • Staking was tacked on to transfer locked tokens, which has been designed for a different use case and potentially created some usability issues, where users would not be able to stake multiple times at the same time from same account.

    • There were regulatory concerns as staking was not tied to voting.

  • Automatic rewards has a similar challenge to the one we ran into with Co-op:

    • We can give you a reward when you vote

    • We can give the proxy a reward when they vote

    • It's very hard to give a reward to all accounts which are proxying their tokens to a single proxy when that proxy votes. Imagine if 1M wallet users have their tokens autoproxied to a single account and now that account votes. The processing required to pay 1M users is huge and underlying data may be changing.

  • Stake via Send (send to proxy FIO Address)

    • Continue to think this is a bad approach. Intercepting a token transfer transaction is just scary and can lead to problems for users. A token send should send tokens and nothing else.

    • It may create unforeseen complexities, similar to when we wanted to treat FIP-6 lock accounts differently. For example using the "special" FIO Address as a as TPID and then claim reward send is initiated to this special address.

2021-07-30 Staking Committee Call

  • Activation time will be added to FIP. This will allow for better marketing of the staking program and allow more platforms to develop integration before Staking is activated on chain.

  • 1M activation limit will be kept.

  • Staking was codes in a way that lets the Staking Rewards accrue before activation. It was decided this is beneficial to the program.

  • Eric Butz will put together a security plan and present to Committee.