“Undelegate” locking days Reduction in Staking

Governance & Proposals
1

Proposed by Tamashi ( @tamashi_papa)

Japanese LUNC community blog

Abstract

When undelegating a staked LUNC, it is locked for 21 days and will not return to the wallet immediately. This proposal is a plan to shorten this 21-day period. A ratio table will be prepared that takes into account the number of days remaining, and to provide a mechanism whereby LUNC can be unlocked immediately and returned to the wallet by paying LUNC on holder’s will. The portion subject to payment is calculated in proportion to the LUNC to be Undelegated.

For example, if 100,000 LUNC has been delegated and you withdraw only 50,000 LUNC and the payment rate is 8%, you would pay 50,000 x 0.08 = 4,000 LUNC.

Detailed interest rate calculations are described below.

Usage of paid LUNC

The money will be distributed to these two categories at this time.

  • Oracle rewards pool (Staking rewards pool): 50%
  • LUNC burn: 50%

The use of the funds can be added or amended in future proposals.

With “USTN” plan the Oracle rewards pool (staking rewards pool) will drastically be reduced, and reward will be reduced as well. In such a case, the advantage of staking will be limited. Based on this, I think it’s desirable to be able to compensate for the reward pool in a way other than minting.

Locking Days Reduction Payment Table

  • If 1 day remaining on lock, pay 1.00% for immediate refund
  • If 8 days remaining on lock, pay 14.11% for immediate refund
  • Immediate refund by paying 45.27% if there are 20 days remaining on the lock

Payment Plan Calculation Method

The above tax rates are determined by the following calculation method.

In Excel
days^28^(1/22)/100

In Python

“days” is variable can be substituted with a decimal point; therefore 4.5 days is also possible. In other words, the remaining time in minutes can be included in the calculation, including 4 days and 12 hours.
Immediate return will be executed by paying 6.78% if there are 4.5 lock days remaining.

Concerns about outflow of funds

The first concern is that if it becomes possible to shorten the locking period for staking, some may think that funds will be drained from the chain at once in case of insecurity. This can be resolved by considering a situation that happened to LUNA-UST.

The question is: “Would being locked for 21 days have prevented the funds from leaking out?” I think the answer is no.

If hyperinflation occurs in LUNC, the outflow of funds will occur regardless of whether there is a lock or not. On the other hand, when deflation was working well, the staking rate remained high. The plan, shorten the number of lock days, will also create a condition in which deflation always occurs. In addition, having a mechanism that can be unlocked in case of emergency will lower the hurdle to staking and may lead to an increase in the staking rate.

Summary

  • The reward pool can be supplemented without minting (casting).
  • More signatures on transaction and more revenue for validators.
  • The hurdle to start staking may be lowered and the number of users may increase.
  • Stimulate LUNC burn

I believe that this Proposal will generate these advantages.

2 Likes
2

It’s still :put_litter_in_its_place::wastebasket: to have the tokens locked for too long. I think that in the future chains that don’t have these kind of restrictions will be more attractive. Putting a price on the undelegation would only be taking advantage of the current problem and not a solution. In addition to being a loss for investors.

3

I really like this idea. I also really like lowering the un-delegation timeframe. Maybe a mix of the two options:

1 - Lower the locking days of un-delegation from 21 days to 5 days
2 - Allow for automatic unlocking at a rate of 5% per day, with a max of 25% penalty for unlocking immediately.

Days remaining / Penalty
5 days - 25%
4 days - 20%
3 days - 15%
2 days - 10%
1 day - 5%

4

the penalty percentage is rubbish. Nobody would use this option if they have to lose that absurd percentage of tokens. I have always liked the fast unbound of anchor protocol

5

it would encourage users to undelegate at an acceptable limit while still allowing them immediate access. Far more flexible than the current mechanism. I bet you would see staking rates skyrocket if there were an immediate path out, even at a cost.

6

That is exactly why we are, where we are. 21 days should never be considered to remove. It’s a buffer, that prevents collapsing. Why do You think anchor is not an option anymore? We need stability.

7

that had nothing to do with the fall of the protocol.
21 days only makes one prefer to staking on exchanges, some offer the same without so many complications and others never lock your tokens.

8

Sorry dude, but you have completly no idea what You are talking about. Anchor was the main cause that took whole Terra ecosystem down.

Do You know what You are comparing? 4,7% from exchange like Binance vs more than 30% from on-chain staking?

9

Hello,

I agree the unstaking period needs to be lowered from the current 21 days. Can a proposal be submitted to be voted on? I read were discussion has to take place first. Where exactly? I can’t even start a new post on the governance and proposals forum…How can we address this issue soon?

Lowering the unstaking time to 10 days would not cause issues.