Start farming reward lock and utilization payments to farmers (closed, see new post to continue)

#21

great post, thank you

  • maybe a combination can be done, nr one was part of the original specs of 3.0 but never implemented, would be good to vote for it though
  • nr 2: does not require people to do commercial activities, that will be done by organisations like threefold cloud in dubai. the 50% kick back to farmers is a great incentive though and the more people do this the more people show that they support the price of 0.1 for TFT.

suggested improvements on nr2

  • all new 3nodes get default lockup to 0.1USD per TFT (we don’t touch existing ones)
    • remark: in future DAO can always change this param at any time
    • existing farmers can opt in, or can stay on option 1 (or current one)
  • 50% of utilization goes to the farmers who locked up their tokens
    • also the utilisation earned tokens are locked at 0.1
  • on voluntary basis supporters can lock part of their TFT assets as well just to show their support (also at 0.1USD min price), maybe the ThreeFold Foundation can reward their 10% off utilisation for the next 6 months?

solutions providers should be removed

  • remove the solution providers, its giving too much headache and doesn’t have required result, and this makes nr 2 possible
  • if farmers deploy on their own nodes then the 50% utilisation fee is given to them

why should farmers go for nr 2

  • they will have more rewards
  • they show that they support a price of 0.1, our liquidity is so low right now that will make the price go there quite fast if enough people show their confidence
#22

very good remark indeed, maybe we need to see with engineers if we can do something for that usecase, so that the locked tokens unlock for utilisation, not sure its possible though

#23

I would not unlock for utilization. I think most of us have acquired enough tokens for a set amount to be locked, take some to cover costs and for utilization. For newcomers, can purchase what they need for utilization. Best scenario would be that they can purchase it easily through exchange platform like kucoin, xt,…

Quick question, when you talk about locked tokens, are we talking about rewards earned per month starting when this goes live or a set amount like flux for example?

I still think its a bad idea to have tokens all unlock at ones at a set price. For sure when that’s 16x the value of now. People will dumped for profits and the price will tank.

#24

Thanks for the clarification Kristoff. Then this would definitely kill the last part of our business I’m afraid. We seriously need to discuss this. Most measures suggested (see this last one above) are not considering vendors (again) who try their utmost to setup a profitable business selling nodes and creating a network of technicians that would help node owners and other customers to setup their services on this net. This is one of many plans we have.
This would improve;
-awareness of the new grid;
-expansion, and therefore stability of the grid;
-utilisation, needed for growth and stability of TFT and create more awareness.

More than half if my customers come back to me after 2-3 months asking how they can use their TFT for utilisation for their own products. I can’t tell them they need to wait two years.
Then there’s those that purchased HP rackserver nodes, of which they want to use many if the monthly TFT to run their own (company) services

The proposals above really take away all these, leaving us empty-handed. We seriously need to get around the table how we go forward together, because I’m starting to loose hope there’s any serious business to be setup for us.

#25

When you say that with option 2 farmers " they will have more rewards "

Does this mean that option 1 does not come with the 50% rewards from utilization?

From what I read above, the 50% is possible with both option 1 and 2. I.e option 1 can be voted. And the 50% can be voted too separately.

#26

What about this:

All tokens from now on are locked until 0.1USD tft price
Then tokens are unlocked based on node registration date: nodes that have been registered 2 years prior have the tokens unlocked, or if the nodes had 30% utilization for 3 months.

So a combination of the two options.

This would prevent a huge sell pressure at 0.1USD price.

#27

If the token was at $0.1 we wouldn’t have this conversation about the token lock. To have the tokens locked for another 2 years after it reaches 10c it’s a very big ask. That’s over 10x from the current price.
Why not work with 8c which is the registration value?
Things are getting interesting :blush:

2 Likes
#28

Before i get more confused; Kristof mentions 2 aspects and 2 options.
In theory I’m not against the idea of utilisation being rewarded to the owners. That would work in our business model. But i would still help node owners use their own TFT to setup utilisation on our gold farm in that case. As far as i can tell, those are all pro’s.

Edit; having said that, if someone purchases an IKON and in stead of 650 now will get 400 TFT for instance, that won’t suddenly not be enough anymore to deploy a decent vm on our gold farm. So they’re mire or less driven to utilize their own node, that 1) is less stable than a gold farm and 2) doesn’t give us an revenue for utilisation. That’s why the solution provider worked better for us.

But if you talk about option 2, it almost sounds as no one can utilise the grid with their tokens until the exchange hits 0,1 minimum. I don’t see that. You just took out the option of using tokens for utilisation and now you wait until it grows?

As @kristof mentioned , we ‘have’ to find a way for tokens to always be allowed for utilisation, as far as I can see

#29

I edited the reply to be clearer.

I am saying that with option 2, when tft reaches 10 cents and the tokens are unlocked all at once, there will be a big sell pressure.

So I propose for option 2.1 (let’s call it that way):

  • tokens are locked until 10 cents market price
  • then the unlocking is based on the node registration date: nodes that have been registered for 2 years have their tokens unlocked

So basically it means that not all tokens would be unlocked when we reach 10 cents. But it would be gradual based on the node age on the grid.

It is a combination of option 1 and 2.

#30

8 cents instead of 10 cents could be a good idea.

We could vote:

  • have tokens locked until a given price (vote yes or no)
  • if the previous vote is accepted (yes to lock at given price) what would be the given price (8 cents or 10 cents)
#31

This hybrid idea is interesting. Since just unlocking at a set price is just a recipie for disaster. However, there is the possibility of TFT not being able to get back to 8 or 10 cents.

1 Like
#32

I am with Robert on needing the locked token to be able to be utilized. Maybe the easiest way to is to simultaneously issue a temporary token that can only be used for utilization and cannot be traded. Basically a credit.

3 Likes
#33

Nice one Nelson! Good idea for the TFT as a credit for utilization.

Might be feasible, as we had TFTA before. We could have TFTU, as in TFT utilization.

1 Like
#34

In the same vein, perhaps we could set that TFT rewards from farming Proof-of-capacity (PoC) is locked based on the options we decide in the upcoming DAO votes, and that TFT rewards from utilization Proof-of-utilization (PoU) is never locked (always liquid).

It gives incentives to farmers to increase utilization and the farmers can also use the PoU rewards to pay for running costs, especially since these costs increase with utilization.

1 Like
#35

What about locking tokens inversely proportional to average utilization over a month? So if utilization is 3% right now, 97% of new farm rewards get locked. If utilization increases, say to 4% it unlocks 1% of the tokens? Or something along these lines? This addresses the root of the problem with current tokenomics - underutilization.

The other thing this may prevent is a potential spike in price of TFT if utilization increases. While high TFT price is good, it also discourages utilization and growth, as the value proposition goes away. People need to trust that the price will be somewhat stable to invest in solution development.

I also think solution providers and farmers should share in utilization. They both bring value to the network and incur expenses.

#36

@kristof I prefer this revised option 2 proposal which in summary:

  1. locks all future farmed TFT until 0.1USD market price is sustained for a defined period (TBD) at which point a phased unlocking program based on length of time that each node has contributed capacity to TF Grid will start.
  2. Farmers will receive 50% of utilisation TFT (previously reserved for Solution Providers) which will also be locked until the same unlocking conditions (above) are met.

These changes should constrict supply of TFT but they will also slow the growth of TF Grid capacity but this doesn’t matter at current low level of Grid utilisation. More far reaching changes to tokenomics in 3.5 and intro of regional internets/Validator Nodes should further improve the outlook for TFT price appreciation.

But in reality to key to a healthy TFT price lies with stimulating demand/ increased Grid utilisation rather than restricting TFT supply. At least IMHO.

#37

:exploding_head::triumph:
Simply incredible this is the “end conclusion” …

#38

Wouldn’t it be amazing if tft was just a token for utilization, and using the grids Cloud capacity didn’t require buying into an entire financial industry where your money suddenly loses half it value?

2 Likes
#39

Hi @linkmark as you may know Green Edge is both a farmer and a solutions provider. We earn tft monthly through connection of compute and storage capacity , we also spend tft to pay for needed capacity to run our zonaris products. We invoice our zonaris customers in fiat in the normal way taking into account the actual fiat cost of the capacity needed (which then gets translated into tft, the payment currency of the grid). Our customers accept our T&Cs and we support our solutions ourselves without relying on ThreeFold. We also pay all our own marketing,engineering etc, and our pricing takes these cost elements into account.
Farming is uneconomic with the token price today so unless something is done to improve the outlook for farmers the grid will begin to shrink as farmers begin to disconnect capacity.
The business models of farming and solutions provider are quite different. Today the cost of TF Grid capacity to a solutions provider is very competitive so it is unlikely that future solutions providers will be put off by removal of the 50% tft rebate, they may however need to rethink the pricing of their offering in the light of slightly raised COGS. Farmers on the other hand need the possibility of additional reward if they are to continue farming.
Given the fact that 35% of tft are burned after use (a good thing) and 10% goes to TF Foundation (I believe) I think it makes more sense at this stage to reward farmers for utilisation of their capacity than solutions providers - and as far as I’m aware our zonaris service is the only commercial solution running on the TF Grid at this time.
Others have attempted to become a fully fledged solutions provider but all have required ThreeFold to support (guarantee) their offering to 3rd party customers. This really isn’t ThreeFold’s job, ThreeFold is focused on developing the TF Grid capability, not on promoting 3rd party solutions nor on becoming their unpaid support department.

3 Likes
#40

Well, if ifs and buts where candies and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.

1 Like