Hello from Sayve Protocol - Let's talk about Pylon Swap

Thats a very nice way to introduce yourself!

First i like the idea with using the pools first and then doing the swap same time after.
The idea that random pool user get guaranteed allocation fits perfectly to your protocol.

For rewarding Mine stakers, maybe do the snapshot soon or take the time from your twitter anouncment. Everybody who staked before can be part of the swap. Do a tier system for Mine stakers that everybody get something and cap the amount whales get. Please no FCFS for the swap.

3 Likes
  1. How should long-term loyal stakers be rewarded?
  2. How much allocation is appropriate?
  3. How do we secure long-term stakers’ interests while ensuring an equitable launch for the public?
  4. How do we define “loyalty”? Given mine’s staking/unstaking is literally frictionless.

  1. longer stake > allocation
  2. for every day of stake 1% of allocation, max allocation cap around:
    1,000 MINE = 100 UST
    20,000 = 800 UST
    20,000 - 50,000 = 1,500 UST
    more than 50,000 = 2,000 UST
  3. 20% TGE 80% daily release
  4. Longer than you stake more loyal are you to the project

Just my thoughts :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hi Sayve,

Also being a long term staker this really gives me confidence in better launches going forward on pylon, and confidence in holding. Really awesome how you approach this.

As for your questions I think I can get behind what zdrifko is laying out.
It really makes sense to max cap it no matter how many MINE you hold.

One dimension that should perhaps be added is time of staked. So time * amount yields IDO points, and then there’s different tiers for your IDO points. With max cap. I don’t have an exact formula for this, but just this overall idea.
And with a minimum amount of time required to stake, before your points even kick in. Two weeks, a month or so.

Also I’m thinking:
How do we combat unstaking? Should the mine be locked like for governance for a while? Should locking them for longer give you a points multipler?

@sayve_protocol:

Q?: hypothetically, if we had a Pylon Treasury Swap mechanism, and our a Treasury could buy your token almost like a normal VC, could you please provide your insights on the following questions:

  1. How much $$ do you feel you need to raise to fund your roadmap?

  2. What % of your fundraise would you be willing to offer as an allocation to all of the most loyal chads in the community?

  3. What kind of lockup would you need to see so that our terms would be on market with any other VC you are talking to?

Again thanks so much for your tone and approach here! Together we are building an important néw community institution for Terra ecosystem, and, quite likely, for the wider Blockchain ecosystem globally! Thus, optimizing the alignment of interests so we the Pylon Community are maximally happy and you Protocol Founder are maximally happy is what this is all about! Please give us all of your feedback, all of your asks, we will do our best to match you and put our community muscle behind you! :blush:

2 Likes

I would like to see people requiring to apply for a white list just as an added protection from abuse, ontop of Mine staked, i belive 10k Mine should be a minimum if you would be interested in such, also to better protect your project, i also belive a 10% TGE, 1month vesting (minimum) then 90% Daily release over 6months would be a better suit.

1 Like

Thanks for the warm welcome guys!

@bettercio:

Great questions!

  1. Currently looking at run-way we are looking at about 2-3 million ust

  2. So as we all know we will be allocating 750m $SAYVE tokens to Gateway Pool on Dec. 8th, allowing us to pay for additional devs (we’ve hired 2 extra blockchain devs) and operation costs for these few months

The remaining 250m will go on Pylon Swaps (Aiming for early Janury).

As for guaranteed allocations:

  • Roughly 15m to 20m will go towards our Alpha testers (who also are pool depositors)

  • The remaining 225m is really up for grabs. From a project team’s perspective it doesn’t really matter who gets them, the long-term stakers or the public investors. But as we’ve emphasized on the importance of building a strong community with Pylon, it will be perfectly fine to distribute these 100% to “genuine” loyal stakers, provided that we can come up with a legitimate way to identify them.

  • For Pylon Swap allocations, again, not 100% set on terms, but it’ll most likely be a 1 month lock-up, followed up by a 3-6 month linear vesting period. This timeline is set in accordance with our internal token emission schedule, with the goal of avoiding drastic dump pressures.

- We do not have any previous presales, seed round, VC investors. The Pylon community will be the first investors.

At Shaun

Good idea.
We have planned a similar selection process for our alpha testers. Investors will need to complete a mini-series of missions + show a proof of pool deposits to be qualified for the alpha tester program.
We cannot release too much alpha here on the forum so wait for our twitter about this in the next 14 days :wink:

At laine_ust

Indeed. Time X Amount certainly has to be the core elements for a loyalty formula.
I believe @limowooj or At ed.pylon can perhaps chip in on this. I think the Pylon team is coming up with a system to solve this issue.

At zdrifko We believe time is an important variable but it cannot be the only variable.There has to be a fine balance and we have to all look for the best formula. Perhaps a credit system can work.

We want to reward the long-term stakers but we don’t want to reward the bots right?
From a project team’s perspective, it won’t really matter that the bots get the allocations but we want real and valuable interactions with human investors as we move forward, not bots who look to dump.

At crosshiller, zhanglingbin thanks for the warm welcome! Hello! I believe FCFS will never happen again in Pylon.

Admin please allow us to use more than 2 @ and hyperlinks

2 Likes

Hey guys! First off I want to say kudos to you guys for deciding to get your funding purely via Pylon (community) and not private sales and VCs. You guys will be setting the standard and showcasing the true power of community funding :slight_smile:

Ok, I read through most and here are my thoughts regarding Swaps for MINE stakers.

TLDR: modified entry barriers

  1. tMINE - Swaps allocations based on amount and time staked. The mechanics of this would be tricky to figure out I’m sure but woojin and team will be able to tweak this as we go. The idea is to set allocations based on amount and time staked. What would the allocation be if someone bought 200k MINE for instance today, vs someone who bought and staked 50k MINE 4 months ago? I think Pylon needs to release some rough calculations for this (tMINE) so the community can vet through. Figuring this one out will have time and iterations.

This one is important - tMINE solves the loyalty issue. Its as simple as having a counter for “DAYS STAKED” @woojin. The moment you unstake, even if you unstake and sell today and buy again tomrorow, the counter resets. This ensures people are genuinely HODLING and not trying to game the system. The number of days staked + amount staked would give you ‘IDO points’ to participate and allocations from there. Maybe there is a weightage, the longer you stake, the more points you can obtain.

  1. Based on data we saw by one of the community members the other day, MINE stakers are top heavy. Imo we should use this data to set some general rules:
  • Stakers below 10000 MINE to have lottery draw for allocations (maybe 5-10% of allocations)
  • Top 1% wallets to be capped at a fixed amount for allocations (maybe 10-20% of allocations)
  • Remaining allocations to be split among stakers >10000 MINE based on tMINE and other barriers
  1. More barriers the better. I am sure while you want to reward MINE stakers, you also want to protect your own project. That being said, give allocations to those who actively follow your project and to MINE stakers that prove they can support a project long term (see my point above for ‘days staked’). This can be done with a bit of ‘gamification’ or whitelisting. Stealth announce a 1 day window for instance for whitelisting on your social media or whatnot. Basically, more entry barriers. Can’t please everyone.

Vesting & Lock ups can help although from what I can see, that might also create sell pressure. Tokenomics-wise as long as not too much allocations are given to VC/private/early/IDO/team thats unlocked early after TGE, it should be fine.

Sorry I typed this all really quickly and might not have thought through some things thoroughly.

EDIT: Guys, just a disclaimer I was pulling numbers out of my ass. But I hope the gist of my point comes across :slight_smile:

5 Likes

Interesting suggestion on the use of lottery allocation and allocation skewed for tMine.

We think just as with how we will be selecting our alpha testers from the pool depositors, we will also apply the same gamification strategy on qualified stakers as well. Great idea on stealth twitter btw, we might just do that :wink:

On a side note, based on our twitter responses we’ve seen how some people never understood the 2 month plan.
We will say this for one last time and if people don’t bother to read then so be it.

  • 2 months (well actually less than 2 months now, probably roughly 5 weeks) is our expected timeline to launch on Pylon Swap (in early January).

Hey @sayve.money

Took a while for me to get to this one. First off, thanks for being an absolute chad and coming directly to the community.

I love the idea of rewarding those who contribute to your alpha testing. Beyond this, if there are other things you think your project needs from Pylon chads, then I think it is worth hitting up the community again.

I think a lot of what I would say has already been said. Here are some of my thoughts though.

  • I believe there will be a reasonable level of demand for tokens offered to MINE stakers. Given this, I imagine the option to raise $3m instead of $2m would help satisfy this demand, as I assume the raise from the swap (if the total is $3m) will be less than $1m (currently there is ~$42m of MINE staked).

  • One question I have is around the initial liquidity. Do you plan to provide the initial liquidity until enough tokens are unlocked for a significant proportion of the investors to then provide liquidity?

All in all, I strongly support the group’s ideas around allocating access to MINE stakers via a time X amount of MINE staked.

Hi,
Thanks for reaching out to mine/Pylon community.
Suggestion on the swap allocation to Mine stakers … I think it can be done in three stages…

  1. Open swap 1st only for long term stakers - say with a period of ~30 days atleast. Wallets can be whitelisted using a process or by assessing the activity of the wallet to avoid bots and whale manipulation.
  2. 2nd open for any Mine stakers (if not sold on the first step)
  3. Remaining tokens can be sold for public to buy. Community/public whitelisting process can be held to build pylon/project community

For pools: Simple mine staking or LP requirement should be nice to get the maximum for both communities.
example to entry requirements on pylon pools:
1000 mine to 200 ust Max allocation
10000 mine to 1000 ust Max allocation
50000 mine to 10000 ust max allocation
100000 mine to unlimited ust allocation to the pools

To reward long term mine stakers - percentage of increased ust allocation can be proposed based on the staked period.

@Woody
Good info on the number of staked wallets.
If we were to raise 3m then it means we’d have to adjust our gateway pool allocation.
This is definitely doable, but we’ll do some calculation and get back to you on this.

Now with a Pylon Treasury being set up, what do you think about having Pylon Treasury pick up a portion of the swaps?

On initial liquidity:
Yes, a portion of our Pylon Swap sale (~100k) will be distributed before the unlock.
Then SAYVE-UST LP incentives (1B tokens over 4 years) will be provided when the unlock happens, to further ensure price stability.

@rockygce
certainly a good idea! A community/public whitelisting process is in our consideration too.

I am a huge fan of the treasury picking up a portion of the allocation. Given its sounds like the swaps allocation will be a function of time and amount of MINE staked, i.e. each wallet will have a max amount they can contribute, there will ultimately be some MINE stakers that don’t fill their whole allocation. Maybe it is these leftover tokens that the treasury can do swaps with? This will ensure you raise the amount you intended.

I think having a level of treasury involvement in Sayve is great because your goal is long term, which is the value behind the treasury swaps (longer vesting/locks). It also helps those who are involved in the pylon swaps to be long term supporters of Sayve.

Thanks for clarifying the info regarding LP.

I am not sure if it has been answered, but will you be requiring KYC for the Pylon Swaps?

Hey guys, just a friendly reminder that our Poll has been created on governance.

Please vote!

We were originally launching without having to create a poll but after discussing with the Pylon team, it’d be a better idea to do it. This way we can slowly establish a consistent standard and it’s better for the long-term health of the protocol as well

1 Like

Can you post the full tokenomics?
For a example, see pylon one:

Normally the swap is done before the gateway pool.
A reasonable sequence is:
swap
gateway pool
liquid pool

If you want to leave the swap for later you can probably consider it the way @bettercio suggest: consider the pylon treaury a VC making an offer. Pylon will then become a shareholder himself.

I would like to have also the following info:
roadmap, token utility, governance
REading this only now afer some research:

Please refer to our website sayve.moneyand medium article that for detailed roadmap, tokenomics and distribution (Links also linked on the website)

The decision to go with gateway pool was to gain some traction (development wise) first before selling the tokens via Swap.

This way it’ll allow potential investors to have better understanding of the project and actual interaction with the application and experiences before making the big decision to buy the tokens.

1 Like

Back to guaranteed allocations for long-term stakers:

It seems like there are several viable options we can go with:

  1. Treasury Sway for a portion;
    the remaining portion goes to mine stakers. However, there’re roughly 32k staking wallets right now and no matter how many tokens we are allocating it’ll not be enough for everyone.
    So perhaps ideally an allocation based on tiered system or credit system is indeed necessary.

  2. Tiered system with min. staking and max. allocation; or

  3. Allocation based on your Pylon Score (credit), but this very much depends on when Pylon team can release this mechanism

Hey Sayve,

I am still very much keen for Pylon Swaps whereby a Pylon score is used (assuming that largely involves time and amount of Mine staked). I am also keen for the treasury to pick up any remaining allocation leftover from the Pylon Swap.

Some other thoughts.

  • The Treasury might not be able to pick up the full allocation initially, as it is still being set up and therefore does not have a huge amount of capital as of yet. For this reason it would be preferable to use Pylon Swap > Treasury Swap.
  • I do not mind waiting until the team has created the Pylon Score mechanism. However, this might not be optimal for yourselves or others. If this is the case, I would be happy to go with option 2 whereby the treasury again picks up any leftover allocation. Although this is a bit more complex than option 2, you could potentially create allocation amounts like this; Take 2 random snapshots of Mine stakers before you announce the Pylon Swap date. Decide allocation amount based on the cubic root (or square) of the average across the 2 snapshots. This should better reward OG Mine stakers and also mitigate an unfair distribution to whales.
3 Likes

Hi, First up, great work in facilitating such an open engagement and exchange of ideas with the community.

Whilst there are a lot of good ideas and options being discussed here i’m a little confused what the actual vote currently open is for?

It describes the project / protocol and then a simple yes/no - I dont know what i’m being asked to vote on given it seems so many of the options are still on the table and under discussion.

Its passed anyway but I would like to understand this please? Was it simply to approve the project launching via Pylon??
Thanks,

1 Like

Many great comments above already.
I’ll add to this my thoughts:

  • simple minimum of 10k MINE staked with a single tiered benefit I think is fine
  • could require either having staked the MINE for >2 months already, or for new stakers, to lock the MINE in a forward capacity for at least 3-6 months (gives the option to new entrants, but still gives an outsized benefit to already-loyal supporters)
  • if there will be a Gateway Pool, give stakers early access, in line with is mentioned here: [Proposal] Early Access on Pylon Pools for MINE staking
  • if there will be a Gateway Pool, auto stake rewards in your governance protocol, in line with what is mentioned here: Auto staking for pool rewards

Heya Baron,

Current vote (that’s just passed) is to launch the Gateway Pools.

Now it’s looking like it’ll launch right after the vote expiration - Dec. 11th

The discussion we have here is simply about the pylon swap IDO that’ll be launched in early January

Hope this clarifies your confusion

Best,