Summary : This proposal is to introduce a decrease of the minimum delegation from 1000 to 10 (or any other amount agreed within the community
Background : When Harmony started open staking in June 2020, ONE token price was ~0.2cts to 0.3 cts. It made sense at that time to enforce a minimum delegation of 1000 ONEs which valued $2 and $3. It was also a way to prevent network spamming which would still applies today.
Motivation : Harmony ONE is still targeting an open consensus for 10 billion user, and for that, we need to be permit everyone the capability to delegate.
Specification : The suggested change is 10 ONEs ~$1.6 as of 10 April 2021. This can be discussed further below.
Suggested voting options : Set a new minimum delegation to 10 ONEs
That’s a nice proposal, I have seen many people contacting me directly and complaining why the minimum of 1000 ONE, which is too high in USD at the moment for some people to start or even experiment with staking.
Not sure though about all the pros and cons of having it at 10 ONEs. What we don’t want is having to change this too frequently, so better stick to a minimum that lasts long enough for majority of people.
hmm yeah 10 might be a bit low, but it really depends on how far the price will go this cycle and how low after another bear cycle starts… i would say lets try 100 minimum? that way also if price goes down a lot, it still isnt just cents
Yeah actually i started with 100 but changed it to 10 so to match the original amount. It’s true we might want to account for ONE price to go down but remember that in certain country, the minimum salary wages is like $ 100 and hence delegating $15-$20 is not small money, we can do a vote in this forum here see if community prefer 10 or 100. If price go down, we can still change that value.
10 sounds good. A small amount will encourage participation.
Delegators would be both delegating and staking more if the minimum drops. It would be great to add an auto-compound option that offsets some of that extra activity and makes it easier on them.
Excellent conversation, thanks for starting it off!
When the 1k minimum was imposed, I believe that it was for security reasons, to ensure that people couldn’t spam the network with transactions and effectively DOS the network.
When implemented, it represented ~ $2-3 USD. I think that is a realistic number to shoot for. As previously mentioned, we need to keep in mind that the value of the token can go both up and down… it won’t keep going up forever… so we should be careful about making it too low.
Realistically, I think that it is reasonable (considering the projections that we are in a super-cycle bull market) to assume that we could at least double our current value before the end of the bull run… as a stable floor.
With that in mind, 10 ONE would equal ~ $3.
I support it.
CAVEAT - How much coding needs to be done in order to change this? @leo@rongjian - if we had the bull market end, and we plummet down to $0.01, this would need to be adjusted to maintain the security of the network. Could that be done quickly, in an emergency situation? (Or am I remembering incorrectly, and it wasn’t for security reasons?)
If it couldn’t be done in less than a week, we might want to stick closer to 50 or 100.
I think 100 is a solid minimum. I’m in agreeance with Ogreabroad’s sentiment. How difficult would it be to implement the change so if the price drops drastically at the top of the parabolic curve we can adjust? Or if the price rises drastically we can adjust?
1000 → 10 is very drastic IMHO. 1000 → 100 is more reasonable. Noted, those are network parameter changes, taking time and effort, I’d be prudent.
I’m in strong favor of this proposal. The Reddit community has expressed the desire to see a lower entry point for staking, especially if we assume price will increase. I think 10 ONE is a bit too small but 100 ONE sounds more reasonable. I would vote in favor of making 100 ONE the minimum stake amount.
what will happen after, since the delegator will no need to wait longer to auto re-stake the reward, from previously need to collect 1000 coin to make another stake… the exponentiality I think more supporting for the small delegators but the rich list will get the best of this?
I am also agree with lowering the amount of the minimum delegation. As you said, Harmony was in the range of 0.005-0.01 for two years, and 1000 $ONE was not a high effort for the majority. Thanks to this bullrun, right now it could be hard for some people around the world to enter in delegation, which ideally this should be open for everyone.
From a “open to anyone” vision the minimum of 10 is perfect, but I am aware of the network implications (and future reevaluation to this number), and I am more in favour of 50-100 one as a threshold. But honestly, a better economical analysis should be made with some sensitive ranges.
There can be another ways to stake for those that could not reach the minimum, some kind of “pool” or even centralized exchanges (although its not ideal).
I feel the need for adjustment for re-delegation purposes, but also to compete with some similar projects that have acted the same. However 1000-> 10 is too fast.
I would recommend a 100 minimum. The reason (for 100) is everyone is able to claim 100 and stake them.
The 100 limit will serve those that stake already, and may get them on a monthly basis. It make the re-stacking easier. Now, we need more time to accumulate 1000 for re-staking.
Out of curiosity, how complex would it be to revert back, at the end of the bull run?
I imagine that we will likely not come back down to these levels, and even 100 $ONE could be a difficult level for many new people to achieve. At today’s price… 100 $ONE would be $14-15, which is quite high in many parts of the world.
Would it be possible to index the locations in code that the “1000” or “100” number needs to be changed, to that it could quickly and easily be changed to keep up with market progress?
This would apply to re-delegation as well. If we drop the minimum to delegate down to 100 ONE, then people would only need to wait until they reach 100 ONE in rewards to be able to re-delegate.
I agree with this. I think an analysis of the ranges and the impact they’d have on network activity should be available for review before we vote. Whether it’s 10 or 100, it’s a subjective call until we fully understand the impact. There are many other ways someone could spam a network without needing to delegate so is that the main concern here? I could see 0.01 causing spam issues, but anything 10 or above seems like it’d be safe from attack. If the motivation is to encourage staking by billions of users someday, we should aim for the lowest amount possible that doesn’t create a security issue or clog the network with unnecessary activity.
Seems the consensus here is to lower the minimum delegate amount, and I do agree with it myself, too. As ValidatorONE said, whether the minimum is set to 10 or 100, we should think the consequences of it considering the price fluctuation of the coin. However, I think the current minimum of 1000 needs to go.
Depending on how big of a change this is and how much work is involved, I would personally go for 100 now and then at a later date, if needed, to 10.
