Another way to help identify alignment could be to issue rewards in sCloud as @andrewsaul said here: CLOUD As The Engine of Sanctum - #24 by andrewsaul
How bout a roadmap for some alignment instead of leaving us in the dark.
1 Like
I get the ask, but honestly I think roadmaps are overrated, they almost always end up being broken or outdated, which creates more frustration than alignment. What matters more is clear communication of priorities and progress as they happen. That gives us alignment in real time without being locked into a roadmap that quickly becomes useless.
2 Likes
So am I asking for too much that stakers should know why they’re staking? We’ve locked up liquidity and have no idea why… I’m being unreasonable?
1 Like
It’s just a roadmap. It isn’t a contract. Clear communication of intensions doesn’t need a roadmap. But no, it’s not unreasonable. I personally don’t need it, as long as there is good comms. And I think sanctum is gradually getting better at that.
Remember, some teams don’t have a strongly defined plan. They make decisions on the fly. For example: The acquisition of Ironforge, and the development and release of Gateway. That would have never been in a roadmap produced a year ago. But it was a fantastic move! And the protocol will grow because of it.
I just don’t think Sanctum is a roadmap type company.
Not addressing stakers before ASR ends is a huge fumble in comms. I won’t FUD them publicly, but I also won’t get hyped up about “what is horizon?”. Wowowow a new landing page.
2 Likes
I can agree that ASR terms need to be fully and clearly defined and followed.
Horizon is a great marketing tool. Aint nothing wrong with that. And landing pages have the potential to onboard thousands, or more.
I get your frustration though. I have some myself.
2 Likes
This is probably an unpopular opinion but I’m not sure the community reserve should be fully committed to staking rewards. Staking can be rewarded in a multitude of ways by the team. I’d be interested in finding other more creative/innovative ways to deploy the community reserve.
Overall I like the general premise of this proposal though. Depending on if we can find other ways to deploy the community reserve, I’d be in favor of distributing 30-50% of the remaining reserve in this manner. Perhaps more if the community can’t find a better use for it, but I think we have enough collective creativity to do better.
1 Like
If we don’t say anything, it can be seen as mutual agreement. When you speak up, at least you make it clear what you agree or disagree with.
The community reserve was intended for the community. We have a voting mechanism in place, and right now we are engaged in that process.
I personally want to believe that what we say and do actually matters. And this current discussion is a great opportunity to demonstrate that.
1 Like
That seems like death to me.
What does giving out staking rewards give in terms of value to the sanctum business?
Passive staking is passive. Passive is not getting anything done
agree with everything you’re saying there for sure. All I’m saying is perhaps we can think of other ways to deploy the reserve that benefit the community other than rewards. If we assume that is a possibility, I’d lower the percentage of the reserve used as rewards from 100% to a lower number. The proposal itself is pretty solid imo.
1 Like
We are talking about allocating 20M CLOUD for the upcoming 6-month ASR season out of a total of 292M in community reserve.
It’s not that it’s a bad idea (and it’s not @pbear , just to be clear) it’s just that we still aren’t any closer to getting a proposal to vote on something that represents a tangible thing that’ll move the price of CLOUD.
2 Likes
Right, and to be clear, I’d be more in favor of half that (10M). Extending the runway beyond 5 years and leaving room for other types of initiatives, not just staking rewards.
1 Like
Nice one!
From what I ve heard from the podcasts it seems like the team is undecided about if they want to keep going with ASR. Something among the lines “we will reward stakers don’t worry we care” was said. I truly believe they do care btw but the lack of votes might be a legit reason to explore other alternatives.(?)
In my eyes I don’t see other ways to reward stakers apart from tokens as there is no intention of revenue sharing (for full disclosure I wouldn’t agree with revenue sharing at this early stage, so I agree with fp and the team on this).
I think that your plan is well starctured.
I agree with the diminishing returns from ASR over the years, and it probably should be structured in a way that ASR X should result is a smaller % return than ASR X+1.
I think the amount of cloud given in each ASR should be voted 1 month before each ASRs expiration date.
Example
Assuming ASR 3 is a thing, vote about ASR4 (yes or no and specifics) one month before ASR 3 ends
I also believe that distributing ASR should have a more strict timeline (rn there is no timeline). To me this is a matter of being professional. I would suggest a 2 week window after the expiration date of the ASR period.
I think 20M CLOUD for a 6 month period is on point.
I also believe that its ASR must be seperate from previous ones OR at least be a 20-80 , meaning 20% of it counting points and votes from day1 and 80% being only about the period of the current ASR.
1 Like
This 
. I’m not so sure ASR continues either based on the recent language being used. My stance in this whole thread is based on this. I’m of the opinion that we can be more creative in general with what to do with such a large percentage of the CLOUD supply.
1 Like
But I think it’s up to the community to initiate that vote 1 month before the ASR ends. Someone has to put forward the proposal. Therefore, it’s more about us (the community) taking the initiative to start the vote on time. We should take more responsibility ourselves.
Please explain the above approach in more detail. I don’t quite understand how it’s supposed to work. I’d appreciate it if you could provide an example with numbers to help me better understand your proposed approach.
1 Like
My understanding is that we have a governance system in place to propose and vote. This is actually a great opportunity to test it in practice.
1 Like
Example
Asr2 reward 500 cloud
User A
You have 100 points in total
70 points in asr2.
Total points in total 1000
total asr2 points 800
Calculation
Assume everyone participated in all votes
20% reward of the reward is calculated from total points.
Reward 500 * 20/100 = 100 CLOUD total reward
100/1000 points is 10% meaning first part of the reward for asr2 is 10 CLOUD for user A
80% of the reward (the remaining 400 cloud) is calculated from points accumulated on asr2
400* 70/800 = 35 Cloud reward for the second part of asr2
Total reward is 45 Cloud
So basically userA would get 80+% of what he got from asr2 if he hadnt participated in asr1 but he got an extra something because he was part of the last ASR.
Not sure if 20-80 is a good ratio to weight this but you get the point.
I started asking about ASR continuation about a month before ASR2 concluded.
Continuing to reward stakers (whether it’s ASR or some other method) should have been something the team brings up instead of leaving stakers in a state of limbo.
There have also been proposals brought up by the community with little to no feedback from the team, yet they knew a vote was going to happen before the end of ASR2 well ahead of time before any kind of proposal was posted on research (please correct me if I am wrong and missed this thread).
3 Likes