Should Rewards be subject to the 28 Day Unthawing Period?

I think this is best as well. Indexers should have the right to draw an active income in order to pay their bills! This is something I can’t imagine anyone to really have an issue with.

Indexers should not have the exclusive ability to “time the market” with in-network funds.

Yes, price volatility on the markets and variability of gas costs means that an indexer won’t always know exactly how much GRT they will need a month from now to meet their expenses. To mitigate this, indexers can choose to move more GRT out of network than they anticipate needing, and keep that surplus as a rainy day fund. The drawback, of course, is that these funds won’t be generating new rewards. But this GRT would essentially be “cash on hand” and “cash on hand” earns a maximum of, what, .5% APY in a traditional fiat bank account?

This seems fair and equitable for all parties.

If this were the system, I’m not really sure that any changes to delegator unstaking rules would be required. Delegators can already unstake a portion of their delegation without unstaking the rest, subject to the 28 day hold- so as it stands delegators can already choose to actively draw on rewards if they so choose.

No one should really want network players to be incentivized to hop on and off network in order to chase the markets- as this would be a wildly destabilizing! Thawing periods ought to be required for any removal of GRT from the network, regardless of network role.

3 Likes