Slash the ApeCoin Only Staking Pool

I was merely expressing my opinion that this AIP idea seems rushed and not well thought out. You are SC and tackle a very sensitive topic here. I don’t want to be combative and insulting. I want to raise the standard. Next time I will phrase my feedback in a friendlier way :wink:

I would appreciate if you would answer any of the questions raised.
In addition, it would be great if you could update the AIP idea and add more reasoning.
What is the thought process behind this idea?
Why cut it by 66%? Why just for Period 2? Why only cut the APE only pool?
Why cut staking in general?

1 Like

Exclude the words BAYC,MAYC & BAKC completely
ApeCoin DAO is for everyone and ApeCoin as well


I am well aware of that :slight_smile:
Staking is a very sensitive & controversial topic. This should not just be addressed casually but should be taken very seriously.
I simply expect more detail and reasoning. Especially if the idea is presented by a SC member.

Why can you not answer a single question, or address any concern raised?


It’s the ApeCoin DAO, not the BAYC/MAYC DAO. If any I would increase the rewards to the ApeCoin pool with longer periods of locking as Jrny suggested. Or leave it as it is.

In the end the community will have the final word, but would love to see those options added if we go to vote :saluting_face:


Where did you see the rudeness? kodama did not behave aggressively. He asks the right questions to which there are no answers. And which are worth discussing. I support - it’s the ApeCoin DAO, not the BAYC/MAYC DAO


I completely agree with you. $APE stake pool rewards should be for everyone, not just apes.


I completely disagree with this and all you will do is make non-apes feel unwelcome to hold $APE if you only favour pool rewards to apes. Apes already get more favourable returns if you stake your ape. $APE is for everyone, not just apes and those who stake their $APE should be entitled to the pool rewards regardless if they hold an ape in their wallet or not.


Completely against this. $APE and therefore the pool rewards are for everyone, not just apes.


100%. This is fair. If it’s a case of saving money, do it across the board rather than segregating non-apes and reducing their rewards.


I believe the ApeCoin DAO is about inclusion and not exclusion and therefore your ideas I find pretty uncomfortable. All you will do is isolate non-ape holders from the DAO and from earning $APE rewards in favour of ape holders. That sounds like a capitalism to me, not a democracy.


Some things have to be done one step at a time.

Screenshot 2023-11-16 at 6.22.59 AM
Screenshot 2023-11-16 at 6.23.37 AM


For a bit of clarity, on December 12th, the staking rewards WILL be adjusted based on AIP-22.

I propose we reduce the $APE only pool and either 1) Allocate those funds to the other pools, 2) Do not allocate those funds towards the pools.

Only one options will make it into the AIP. Personally I would love to see the 10 Million used to build a better staking mechanism altogether, something more in line with either a CRV model, or one that incentivizes LP.

I was a big fan of Felds proposal to move the Apecoin only rewards to Deed holders and was disappointed to see it withdrawn.

Either way, this AIP will go up with one option and if it does not pass; staking rewards will continue as described in AIP-22. :saluting_face:

I did have a constructive thought yesterday, and this has reminded me - why don’t we do a poll via the APECOIN TWITTER FEED, as at least that way the data will be less skewed (bc Dfarmer and yourself are very deep in the Yuga ecosystem and one could argue the poll results only reflect that part of the community or at least heavily favour that side).

Maybe just an exact replica of Dfarmer poll. But also ofc do it for a period of at least 2 days so every time zone sees and partakes. As I do see merits in all of the arguments ngl.


I think this AIP should move to draft and ultimately vote. This is the best way to know where the community stands in terms of the Equality guiding value (“One APE equals one APE”).

1 Like

As Gerry alluded to earlier, proposals in Idea stage are intended to be rough, informal concepts used to spark larger conversation. Often, the community feedback is what ends up refining the content of the more formal Draft version that comes later.

We actively encourage Ideas be presented in as approachable and conversationally-driven a manner as possible, especially on a topic like this that’s specifically designed to elicit feedback and input.

1 Like

This is a great point. Polling data can become exceptionally biased when it’s not a true randomized sample that covers all relevant demographics. So now we know the opinion of the average follower of Dfarmer who is still active on Twitter, but will that trend maintain true across a much larger segment? Even sticking to Twitter only introduces a lot of bias to those who are still active on Twitter, and follow the account in question.

Which makes me wonder, why not put up the options for vote? You could certainly use informal polling to inform what options to vote on via an AIP.


If we put up 5 options that were all rational, the FEW would be able to simply choose which option they wanted unilaterally.

This conversation will serve as an additional level of input to balance out the aforementioned bias that may arise on a single platform.

That said, we received thousands of votes. I can only dream of that kind of participation on the forums. It would be wonderful if those who are adverse to the options presented so far would run their own polls and present some data.

Well, this is more a critique of our voting system. A critique that I agree with, but a recent AIP that attempted to address this was prevented from even going up for vote. I don’t agree with that.

I personally think more options better combats the whale issue, as if they differ enough in their opinions, it naturally splits the vote. A or B votes offer less room for that variance. That being said, now that Machi has over 7 million $APE, we could just ask him what he wants. :joy:

IMO end staking. I believe Yuga has made 3 major errors thus far. One of those major errors was converting BAYC / MAYC into financial instruments via staking. $APE was designed to be bigger than the BAYC / MAYC communities, so let’s move apes back into being for the culture, instead of for the interest rates.


Isn’t this discussion somewhat of a sub-topic of AIP-361 already in draft phase? ie slashing APEonly pool could be an option if there is alignment behind reducing APEstaking emissions in general?