Modifying Cobra's lockup schedule to 97% locked / 3% unlocked?

There have been some minor discussions in the community about changing Cobra’s lockup system to be more aggressive compared to Viper’s.

The reason for this is that users on Binance Smart Chain are more prone to be more aggressive with selling their liquidity farming proceeds.

Pros:

  • Reduce selling pressure in an ecosystem with participants who (might) have a tendency to be very eager to sell.

Cons:

  • Complexity - would lead to a lot of complexity and confusion when managing the two separate communities. Would lead to a lot of extra documentation and a lot of extra work for community managers.
  • It’s a guess - there are no definitive guarantees or proof that BSC users will go crazy and just instadump everything they farm. 95/5 lockups could prove to be sufficient to curb selling pressure since they might’ve seen Viper’s traction on Harmony (~60x from launch).
3 Likes

What about 95.5 locked / 4 unlocked / 0.5 percent goes to viper LPs?

2 Likes

That a fair compromise, I think. It does seem to be extra work and Cobra participants might get salty when they see the differences. It’s a moderate hedge and completely fair and helps protect against volatility. I’d say yes.

2 Likes

I think that would create a forced feel to migrate to viper and that might not a good ideia.

1 Like

Otherwise it will create forced feel to migrate to cobra and I’m not sure what will prevent it.

1 Like

I am in favor of keeping the 95/5 lockup for now because as you declared in cons it’s just a guess that bsc users will go mad and buy&dump.

7 Likes

I like the sound of 95/5. These are numbers that make sense and give some room to work with the initial unlocked proceeds.

Due to the increased complexity and confusion for the management of the communities, I would say to avoid any change. That is the last thing we want for our devs who already have a lot on their plate.

If its not too difficult, there can be an option to lock all rewards for a couple weeks/month to avoid initial dumping, and unlocking of rewards a little bit at a time thereafter.

I also like the sound of 0.5% going to viper LPs to decrease pressure to migrate and reward the viper-folks.

Either way, I look forward to this discussion and to what it’ll bring.

2 Likes

97 / 3 is great , as you mentioned binance people are more papery :wink:

1 Like

I’m in favour of keeping 95/5. Some of the following points might sound familiar to people who read my reply to the 128x extension, but I think they apply here as well:

Any changes to the lockupsystem on the various platforms could lead to:

  • potential Fud from the party on the short end of the stick
  • additional dev/documentation work that could be used on additional features
  • additional work for mods / confusion in the social channels

I also see a potential “dump” as a non-issue. The majority of the very first COBRA LP’s are likely going to be existing VenomDAO community members who are competing with a smaller group of BSC-farmers. They’d be scooping up the biggest share of the rewards anyway.

Even if the assumption that BSC farmers are more prone to dumping remains true, they would do so on a much more competitive market. The issuance is still the same, while there’s more buyers, so the dumped tokens should be scooped up by the market easily. Should there still be a massive dump-fest, it’s gonna subside after a few weeks, when the issuance is lowered.

A 97% lockup would result in a much scarier cliff at christmas time. The problem of dumping would not be eliminated, just moved to a later date. I don’t think it’s worth adding additional dev/mod/document and giving room to FUD for that.

The worst we’d see in the long run is probably just a slightly different price curve.

8 Likes

Against this one.

I think it’s important to have both cobra & viper be as similar as possible - do not want to give off the impression of any unfairness, which we are already risking a bit if we extend the 128x.

Perception is obviously important - less ammunition for fudders and hesitancy will be better.

5 Likes

Voting to keep it 95/5 - unless there’s evidence that this isn’t enough to tame the BSC crowd? Would like to make each ecosystem under VenomDAO umbrella as equal as possible so that there will be no future backlash.

4 Likes

Will be investing further in Cobra, but whatever is best for Viper. The experience of viper was amazing, have so much faith in ONE, I would like to see it succeed above all else. Whatever happens, great work.

[quote=“0xViper, post:1, topic:17”]
The reason for this is that users on Binance Smart Chain are more prone to be more aggressive with selling their liquidity farming proceeds.

Pros:

  • Reduce selling pressure in an ecosystem with participants who (might) have a tendency to be very eager to sell.

Cons:

I vote for sticking with the 5/95%

2 Likes

My vote is for 5/95

1 Like

It would work nice if the viper Lps were an already closed community, like delta financial launch related to cvault finance.

5/95 just like Viper for me.

1 Like

im against this one. prefer 95/5

1 Like

I like 95/5, it’s more of a round number and sounds nicer than 97/3, also it’s good to keep it consistent with viper. 95 percent lock is a lot already, 97 sounds like a little too much.

1 Like

I’m for this proposal.

Using 93/7 won’t add any complexity to the community management, as this ratio will be clearly stated at Cobra Exchange UI.

In return for the higher lockup percentage, we could decrease the locking period (for example to 9 months). The ones who would stay VenomDAO for the entire locking period - would be most likely already the strong supporters of the project.

Again, @0xViper please add a poll to the header post of this thread.

95/5

1 Like