Yes, I was reading it correctly, and I just wanted to double-check on TT that it goes to our active/loyal players.
I recognize TT as one of the best community members.
1 Like
I just want whatās best for community. That includes Players/stakers/investors/team. If I hear from all groups of out community and the majority says they want this. I will support this. This is a huge. HUGE chunk of RBW allocation we are talking about moving to a unknown place. This would need complete clarity for accounting and transparency purposes.
i agree to this proposal as it rewards active players and those who are in for the long term.
1 Like
Have to say. I am hearing a lot of support for your idea. Just might change my mind.
1 Like
Finally! A proposal for the active players. Love it!
1 Like
Just to clarify, as Nanessa mentioned earlier, if this proposal were to pass in its current state, the reduced RBW would NOT move to an unknown place.
It would be unlocked following the same token unlock structure outlined in the whitepaper, it just wouldnāt be distributed. The staking contract would still be in possession of it.
A future proposal would be used to dictate where this extra RBW would/could be allocated.
I guess I just feel important information is missing from the proposal to move it forward. Having a plan in place and detailed information. The above is a piece of the puzzle. But for people to vote on it. It should have full information available to those voting. Just having a full plan is what i am asking for. Not we will make it later. Thatās not a plan.
3 Likes
For a change of this magnitude it deserves educating the players and users. A medium article. Questions on townhall. Sounded like LG has been in talks with proposal with author. So its a serious proposal and author from sounds of it is expert in this avenue. Education and clarification is all I want to see at this point. Then a revision of proposal with full details.
1 Like
Kinda agreed with that, I already wrote about that in discord except my idea was allocate all RBW rewards for the RBW/ETH LP staking and remove entirely the single side RBW staking.
If we really want to leave the single side RBW staking, we need at least to allocate a bigger part of the rewards to the RBW/ETH LP staking.
2 Likes
Can someone outline the pros and cons of this proposal?
And @timetraveler is too emotional
Whatās everyone writing about going for awards in the rankingsā¦
Letās just tell it like it is, the main awards go to and will go to the active players WALLETS, not ordinary players who can not invest that much in the game.
So if we do a discussion, we should do it in conjunction.
Cut APR - increase rewards in such and such events, and in such an amount.
So far there is no special opinion, because I did not see from the information provided any specifics.
The message is only one - cut APR to reduce the pressure on the cost of token RBW, all
Iām delighted to have you here, but please refrain from saying anything negative about anyone, as I had to do in order to see the big picture here.
I believe we are all emotional in some way, and questions and discussions are necessary.
- Pros
I can see players getting more rewarded for playing
I can see more players joining because they are earning for playing
- Cons
I can see Stakers/Partners/Investors take a short term hit.
What do you mean? What does this have to do with negativity?
I gave my opinion on @timetraveler as you can tell by how many posts have been left here.
Without making any claim to @timetraveler address 
About the perks, without understanding how rewards will be distributed for certain events (ranking, as they do now (the table with rewards for rank), it is difficult to say anything).
By the way, the current table of rewards is different from the fall event table
As far as I understand it, this is done to remove the leftist multi-accounts that aim for minimal rewards followed by selling them on OpenSea.
The rewards at the beginning of the ranking, on the other hand, have gone up.
1 Like
By the way, this is where they write that all the stakers put their profits in the glass.
Are there any statistics?
Is it possible to see how much is poured into the glassā¦?
Using my example:
- Iām either reinvesting in staking
- Or itās spent on breeding or berries in the game.
This proposal has nothing to do with leaderboard rewards. There are suggestions that the extra RBW can be allocated there, but that is NOT part of this proposal.
I support this idea but I do not think single sided staking rewards should be greater than LP rewards (i,e 172603>156422 proposed). LP takes a lot more risk in providing liquidity which is a very useful service for the token. LP rewards should increase at least 200% imo.
1 Like
I disagree with this, in that its not LG making a change. This is a community proposal.
Also, you said it yourself earlier, the LG team has enough that they need to be laser focused on, and making a medium for something like this would be a huge waste of time IMO.
I also disagree with the idea that this proposal needs to have anything more than reduced emissions outlined. This addresses the immediate need, with an immediate solution. The next steps can be outlined within future proposals, that give the community just as much a voice into what happens with the extra RBW. These future proposals are where we can afford to wait and debate, in regards to what is done with the extra waiting RBW.
I love the proposal.
As I recently posted in Founders chat, I think staking should be outright abolished, but there is a need for governance, so a huge reduction in APR would be good.
Iād vote yes for this change.
1 Like
I am aware of this, which is why I write that if resources are withdrawn from somewhere, then they need to be deposited somewhere.
And the two events need to be linked.
That is, there must be an outline of the probabilities of where these resources are to be deposited.
And the change of this circle should take place in agreement with the DAO
I disagree. This proposal doesnāt need to outline anything more than reduced emissions. Once that agreed upon, future proposals should be used for suggestions on what to do with the extra RBW we have sitting in the staking contract.
By trying to talk about the next step, we will hold up the critical piece of slowing emissions. Also, thatās something that can be easily agreed or disagreed upon. Talking about what to do with the RBW could lead to dozens of options and dozens of community debates.
Nothing will happen with the RBW until the community decides. We donāt have to rush that piece.
2 Likes
i like this idea that focuses more on players and offers more rewards
because for long term the game players supported the game can go on.
But it should also give a balance to the staker/investor.