Move Apestake staking protocol to Apechain

[SmartAPE]

@chimperton

I believe that ApeChain and the ApeCoin DAO continue to be far too Yuga-centric. I think the staking system contributes to that belief. People avoid the DAO because they believe it’s only for apes. I think people will avoid ApeChain for the same reason.

Pretty to the choir there. Most of us get that it’s a club; which is all well and good, but the fact is that the club is neither large enough nor diverse enough for long-term sustainability. But the club doesn’t want to hear this; at least not those who are paying attention or who actually care. And that’s how a 1B treasury went to zero in a little over two years.

It’s this same challenge that we are currently having over my MMO platform vs Otherside and which I described over here yesterday.

Thing is, very few in the club are going to care. They’re not going to listen. Then, +1 year from now, just like the financial crisis that the DAO is currently in, we will be having this same discussion about what went wrong with ApeChain. And there will be zero accountability. Nevertheless, I still hold out hope for ApeChain because I have to believe that behind-the-scenes, all involved are aware of the stakes.

@chimperton

Counter that with Abstract by Pudgy. They didn’t call it PudgyChain because they had the foresight to realize that this would make people who were not penguins feel excluded. So they used a name that wouldn’t cause that.

Yup. There was a whole discussion about this before. In fact, in our ACE platform pitch to them, they were very adamant that Abstract was an all-inclusive “consumer chain”. And they have thus far stuck with that message - even within their dev channels (to which we were given access since the chain launched), docs, marketing materials, social media etc.

@chimperton

But importantly, $APE still has a connotation of only being for apes, and the DAO carries the same stigma. Even apes who DO stake and DO have $APE don’t participate in large numbers. They look at the DAO as a thing that’s driving their bags to 0. To some extent it is.

Yes. And that’s why they don’t care about it and would rather see it go away. Since I wrote this tweet yesterday about the DAO financials, the number of DM chatter that I’ve had surprised me more than anything else because the general consensus was “Sad, but is probably a good thing for the DAO to no longer exist”

It’s just crazy to me how the DAO releases disastrous financial data - that’s two whole quarters behind, which means they’re probably even worse today - and very few seem to care.

@chimperton

So we can continue to be ape-centric, Yuga-centric, or we can be pragmatic and choose to stop doing the things that have thus far driven all values down, and try something different. Try something radical.

That sort of behavior comes with rapid change. As a DAO we don’t have the luxury of change, let alone anything that resembles a rapid one. And when I read election statements I just shake my head and wonder how on Earth any of those people believe that 1 out of 5 can make any difference - to anything. I mean, aside from a few of our notable leadership past and present, very few even engage in the DAO community. But they do post the usual WAGMI nonsense once in a while and rejoice in the 10 likes on X.

[SmartAPE]

@chimperton

The point isn’t to end staking in order to make the number go up. It won’t do that.

The point is to end staking to slow down the decent to 0, which is currently happening, in order to allow the DAO to extend its runway to buy time for actions to occur which will create real, sustainable demand.

The DAO is truly in a crisis, I do not believe that’s an overblown statement. We do not have much time left, so any way to slow the proverbial bleed is a net-positive in my book.

I saw this coming, and like the financials, it was part of the impetus for creating this discussion We should kill APE staking. lol ahead of my making it into a proposal.

[SmartAPE]

@bigbull

Also reducing staking is unreasonable to people who bought NFTs and APE knowing they can stake with them.

I agree with this. But the fact remains there was no guarantee of performance nor any warranties made . And so, this can be changed at any moment in time - and without notice. And it was a proposal that made it happen, and a proposal can just as well reverse it. But you already knew that.

@bigbull

If launch partners and Yuga reduced their allocation by the same percentage it would be reasonable (specifically for their ape which is locked and they don’t get staking rewards, or do they get rewards on the locked part not received yet?) Which they can’t legally without all parties agreeing and probably don’t want to.

They have no incentive to do that.

[SmartAPE]

I went digging and found the proposal that voted to keep the token on eth AIP-41: Keep ApeCoin within the Ethereum ecosystem - Process. So, that’s what we would be replacing if this proposal were to go to vote.

[bigbull]

@SmartAPE

I mean, aside from a few of our notable leadership past and present, very few even engage in the DAO community

I think it is important that people in elected roles should engage in the forum. I have seen how in ENS Stewards and Delegates are very active in the forum.

I also really like how the snapshot voting is integrated into their Forum. They also have tags for delegates, which is also useful.

For example:

I also like how they tag the delegates like this. One of the concerns often brought up is “How to reach delegates”.

Arbitrum takes a more open approach with their forum. They also have a massive delegate Incentive program. We are doing what we can given our budget limits.

https://snapshot.org/#/arbitrumfoundation.eth/proposal/0x0e646ace733f4a098ac7036dbadad8465ea65c8e3c485e014501d41b7b439d87

Also, for elected roles I think compensation must have a large % in APE vesting over 12 months versus all pegged to USD. Stewards need to be aligned with holders.

For Contractors, they can take more in USD pegged or all in USD pegged, as these are not elected roles.

Saying what I think, some will like it, some won’t.

Have a great weekend ApeCoin Fam.

[romantik]

There is no need to move staking. Apechain has automatic native yield that comes from staking contract on eth. So you can just hold ape on apechain and it will be the same as if you stake it on eth.

[romantik]

@chimperton

yield will use something like MakerDAO

that is only for apeUSD.

ETH yield comes from Lido.
APE yield comes from the staking contract (self-staking pool).

[romantik]

Native Yield on ApeChain - ApeChain Docs

[SmartAPE]

@romantik

There is no need to move staking. Apechain has automatic native yield that comes from staking contract on eth. So you can just hold ape on apechain and it will be the same as if you stake it on eth.

Yup. But I think @yatsiu is focused on the things like fragmentation, TVL etc.

[SmartAPE]

@chimperton

Interesting for a wide variety of reasons. I stand corrected, thank you!

Those docs are recent and this wasn’t previously known.

[LOR3LORD]

What would the cost be to pull something like this off?

[SmartAPE]

I wouldn’t peg it at more than $150K. With the pre-existing tools, it’s really not that hard. As I said, any one of us devs with blockchain experience could do it with a team of max 2 people on it full-time.

Anyway, it depends on whether a team of contractors or a company are hired. Either way, it will cost more than it normally would. I mean, just few months ago, McCurry got $750K to build a $40K DEX on ApeChain. heh

I feel that this is something that should have been a part of the ApeChain RFC so that it can be done in parallel with the creation of the chain. I guess nobody was thinking this far ahead. Shocking, if you ask me. /s

[Chris.Admin]

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@yatsiu has requested to extend the community discussion period for this AIP idea. This topic will automatically close a further 7 days from now. We encourage the community to continue to engage in thoughtful discussions through constructive criticism, honest feedback, and helpful suggestions.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

-@Facilitators

[furiousanger]

@bigbull

I think it is important that people in elected roles should engage in the forum.

Had five minutes and was catching up - what if we went even further and introduced a small change to end herding, bribery, popularity contests and politics when it came to special council appointments - let’s introduce a randomised selection to the final stage of SC elections (sortition) - making appointments fairer.

When six month forum membership & TL2 were introduced as entry requirements for special council nominees we moved further away from a meritocracy; instead championing & elevating devoted community members (which btw, given SC role requirements, I agree with). So with that in mind, why would we let the SC election process (in this instance) be determined by herding, bribery, popularity contests and politics?

Simple solution would be at the final stage - remaining pool - we’d choose with a fairer & proven system using random selection (sortition)!

Just my two cents on how we can go further and make all our elections fairer.

@12GAUGE.Admin

Special Council nominees must have been discourse members for at least 6-months prior to the commencement of the term for which they are running and must have achieved a minimum of Trust Level 2 on discourse.

[yatsiu]

The original staking contract was not that expensive and I’m told it’s not that expensive to make the change but perhaps a better alternative is to just have claim only on apechain unless you automatically restake?

As for ending staking I suspect you would find more objection from others rather than MOCA because they don’t benefit from staking anyway. I’m not disagreeing that staking should end but I think there are 150m current reasons why it won’t succeed, the MOCA vote is a tiny fraction of that.

On a related note as a lot of the naked ape staking is via centralized exchanges it may end staking on centralized exchanges or at minimum force it on-chain and/or force the exchanges to adopt Apechain

[SmartAPE]

@yatsiu

The original staking contract was not that expensive and I’m told it’s not that expensive to make the change

That’s all true, hence my post above about the costs. Yes, it could be less depending on whether or not we hire an experienced dev or an intern to do it. lol

but perhaps a better alternative is to just have claim only on apechain unless you automatically restake?

That could work; but it comes with some intrinsic [security] issues. Plus, believe it or not, it’s more work than just migrating it in whole.

@yatsiu

As for ending staking I suspect you would find more objection from others rather than MOCA because they don’t benefit from staking anyway. I’m not disagreeing that staking should end but I think there are 150m current reasons why it won’t succeed, the MOCA vote is a tiny fraction of that.

Yup - there’s that. However, most of the voting wallets likely won’t even know about the vote let alone participate in it. heh.

@yatsiu

On a related note as a lot of the naked ape staking is via centralized exchanges it may end staking on centralized exchanges or at minimum force it on-chain and/or force the exchanges to adopt Apechain

That’s actually a good [causality] point.

[Chris.Admin]

Hi @yatsiu,

The community feedback period for your proposal would be ending in less than 24 hours.

• If you’re content with the feedback received, your next steps are to finalize your proposal using the AIP Draft Template.

• A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft. Upon receipt of the final Draft, we will review and provide instructions on the next steps.

• Are you ready to proceed to the next phase or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?

We look forward to hearing from you.

-@Facilitators

[yatsiu]

@SmartAPE

@yatsiu

On a related note as a lot of the naked ape staking is via centralized exchanges it may end staking on centralized exchanges or at minimum force it on-chain and/or force the exchanges to adopt Apechain

That’s actually a good [causality] point.

That may be interestingly one of the top reasons to do it but on the assumption that Staking were to continue I also think having claims on apechain is a great way to get awareness and porting people over to Apechain

[likkee.eth]

@yatsiu

assumption that Staking were to continue

In this case, it will be better for us to discuss later, after the current stake ends. New proposal on staking v2 deployment on ApeChain instead of migration, which is not worth for DAO to invest an NOT TOO SMALL amount for it.

@yatsiu

great way to get awareness and porting people over to Apechain

Beside this, the Native Yield of ApeChain is already handling this role.

[yatsiu]

@likkee.eth

Beside this, the Native Yield of ApeChain is already handling this role.

My understanding is that this is not for NFT staked APE and that naked staking is a separate pool which could make it a kind of “double dip”

@likkee.eth

In this case, it will be better for us to discuss later, after the current stake ends. New proposal on staking v2 deployment on ApeChain instead of migration, which is not worth for DAO to invest an NOT TOO SMALL amount for it.

I haven’t done the exact math but isn’t there still around 30-35m APE (or possibly more) in staking rewards? If that’s the case I would say that this is definitely worth for the DAO to invest in the migration as that would be a meaningful reward pool to do more on APECHAIN.