"Non-gameable" earnestness- and importance of retroactive EXP in S2

As most have probably realised, it will be difficult to reward earnestness how it was in S1. Going the same route will be difficult as people are now aware of it, and possibly trying to “game” earnestness for Wonderland 2. I think we as a community can try communicate and share ideas of how the team can possibly make earnest users rewarded. Naturally these ideas should be ones that are impossible/difficult to take advantage of for anyone who might wish to “game the system”

I had one suggestion on this topic that I shared in the discord, but figured it could be a better place for further discussion here. Also would welcome other ideas of “non-gameable earnestness” that could be important to implement.

My personal suggestion was; Include retroactive EXP/points for S2, aka retroactively credit people for holding Sanctum-LSTs from S1 end up until S2 launch.

This was done for S1 (EXP for LST held prior to S1 launch) and I think its one of the most effective way of protecting Wonderland 2 against mercenary capital.

Protection against a scenario where mercenary users is attracted by what would be a higher airdrop-farming-yield (due to shorter real EXP earning duration), and therefore also protection against earnest capital being diluted and resulting in smaller airdrop.

Example:
Person 1: Holds 100 INF since S1 end (lets say 6 months) and gets 0.01% of S2 airdrop)
Person 2: Holds 100 INF since S2 start (lets say 3 months) and gets 0.01% of s2 airdrop)

One user holds for twice as long, but they both receive same airdrop in the case of no retroactive EXP.

Now to what I think is possibly most problematic, in a scenario where Wonderland 2 seasons is announced with no retroactive points/EXP:

Person 3; Sees previous capital locked doesnt count, deposits 100,000 INF for the duration of the season to capitalise of the fact that S2 airdrop yield is higher due previous held TVL*duration not counting towards S2. This big inflow from Person-3 then also results in both person 1 & 2 now a smaller share of S2 airdrop (dilution by mercenary user).

I think everyone would agree its very fair to reward people for the duration held since S1-end, and arguably the simplest way of mass-rewarding earnest behaviour. I dont imagine its too complicated to do it from a technical standpoint considering it was already in place for S1. Also important to include defi-EXP (at least for more popular dapps) retroactively in that event, as I imagine more people have explored defi opportunities with their LSTs since S1 end.

Thats enough of my yapping. Keen to hear if anyone disagrees, and more importantly I hope to hear other non-gameable approaches that can be done to reward “capital-earnestness” / limit mercenary behaviour in S2.

15 Likes

Really agree with this, we need new method to reward backbone user in capital way and contribution perspective. I think the retroactive is very fair because its like what fp said before “capital earnestness”.

We can play season 2 for users to try new feature if sanctum too like creator coins and especially cardSOL. Active usage of the new feature can be considered

7 Likes

no issues with retrospective exp or capital earnest if thats the phrasing we are going to use

just a cautionary point to factor in

taking INF as a example (average hold shown on the community made dune dashboard is 17.2 INF) but we have some large holder (in the 100s / 1000s held) whom have held since the beginning in May or before (just as a fir instance, a top 100 holder, has held circa 900 INF since May)

we’d need to also to be fair to all, have to track all the DeFI platforms where INF can now be deposited (most of which either weren’t available or tracked for S1)

9 Likes

Agreed I think some reward should be given to users that have been loyal to the sanctum lsts and cloud token.
However, earnestness as I view it is more focused on community & pushing the values of our community. We want to better educate users to understand the importance of lsts, unfortunately any onchain metrics are easily gamble and have too many attack surfaces.
If we use community proposals, noticeable individual contributions, consistent helpers in the discord etc earnestness is less gamable as it involves thinking & consistent human output rather than any automated gamble process. I’m not sure if this how the team views it, but earnestness is more about individual contribution to pushing the ecosystem forward than holding some lst products or the token.
Thanks for the post, I still think multiplier for exp in S2 is deserving of loyal users

5 Likes

I’m more in favor of quadratic rewards. Lets say a whale adds 1k INF, a shark adds 100 INF, and a guppie adds 2 INF, the square of 1,000 is 31.62, the square of 100 is 10, and the square of 2 is 1.41. So the whale will earn the highest share, followed by the shark, and then the guppie but because it’s not 1-1 in regards to the earn rate it keeps the whales(mercenaries) from getting the majority of the rewards just because they have more capital. It not only helps with decentralization but also helps even the playing field of all classes of users instead of the rich getting richer and the poor getting crumbs.

Any multiplier should be added after the season is over. Lets say the guppie held 2 INF from season 1 but the whale bought their INF the day of season 2, the guppie would receive .01x/INF for every day they held INF without selling, so if they held 2 INF for 90 days between season 1 and season 2(just an estimate of time) then they would receive .01 x 2 x 90 x season 2 point total which would be 1.8x their total points.

If someone held INF the whole time from season 1 to the end of season 2 then they get an additional .005/INF or their season 1 point total.

Anyone that didn’t sell their season 1 airdrop and participates in season 2 should also get an earnest bonus of double their allocation with a min of 100 and max of 1,000 if those numbers work with the season 2 airdrop amount. At the same time there should also be a slight bonus for season 1 participants that participate in season 2. Maybe a flat rate 100 $CLOUD for any wallet that acquired over 1m season 1 points and gets 1m season 2 points before any multipliers are added.

All rewards should be capped. No wallet should be allowed to get more than .0005% of the drop, that’s 5k $CLOUD per 10m of supply. I think that’s a fair amount for whales, 5k $CLOUD = $2,250 @ $0.45/$CLOUD, it’s 2.25% on $100,000. If season 2 last 90 days then it ends up being 9% APR which I can’t see any reasonable person complaining about.

Sybils should be heavily deducted, like 90% loss, in order to discourage gaming the airdrop while still giving them a pittance for adding liquidity. The percentage has to be enough that it makes it not worth the risk.

Other than these factors I don’t believe earnest allocations should be given out considering season 2 is supposed to be about rewarding capital investors. Because of that, all multipliers should be based on capital, whether that’s holding capital between seasons, adding capital, or participating in both seasons.

6 Likes

Season 2 is supposed to be about rewarding capital investors so earnestness this time shouldn’t be about community efforts. I say this knowing I would be more likely to be rewarded for community engagement over my monetary contributions so don’t think I’m trying to look out for myself here. Earnestness just has to be based on monetary efforts this time in order to be fair, the project can’t afford to be seen doing the same thing after saying season 2 is focused on capital.

5 Likes

Totally agree with this. However, it was said “earnest capital” (@nicshodln). So it seems capital will be coupled with earnestness. I personally don’t think there is a way to make this 100% fair.

Earnest support and capital support are so different. I understand that a project needs capital for growth, but I think there are a variety of other ways to receive that capital. When a reward is offered for retail capital, you are basically welcoming short term support by investors who just want to grow their bags. I call it greed, but that’s not the point here.

My approach would be to have 2 completely separate reward systems. Then there should be no confusion on what you are qualified for, and how/why you qualify.

In any case clarity and transparency is very important.

5 Likes

Earnest Capital would be the multipliers I spoke of, rewarding those that held between seasons, those that didn’t yeet their airdrop, those that held INF instead of other LSTs(kind of important for the future of LSTs), etc, The first season rewarded the social aspect of earnestness, promoting the project without expecting anything in return and helping others in discord and socials. While that is no less important this time around, it can’t be a major factor in allocation again IMO because there’s no way of determining how much is earnest and how much is gaming.
The only way earnest allocations work is if the parameters are unknown ahead of time.

The transparency aspect is very important after the fact. I’ve never seen an airdrop that didn’t have accusations of team misconduct whether true or not. Almost always it’s because the detailed formula for the airdrop is unknown and multiple wallets with massive allocations always tend to be new, unknown, undoxxed wallets that no one has any idea who they belong to or why they got such large allocations. It typically is seen as them giving themselves airdrops and it doesn’t help when those wallet insta-dump. I’d love to see a transparent airdrop but I’m starting to believe they don’t exist.

3 Likes

Yes, agreed.

By clarity and transparency I mean clarity on the separation and difference between the 2 pools, if the idea of 2 rewards systems was explored. The detailed parameters of each should be fairly unknown.

And I’m not saying that “if this then that” type airdrops don’t work. I love games, and Wonderland 2 will quench that thirst, as season 1 did. But I think that other parts of support should be free of gaming.

I really don’t envy the Sanctum team when it comes to developing a reward/airdrop structure. :laughing:

4 Likes

Nice Topic.
I think the Team already made their experience on S1 airdrop. I don’t think that they are interested in going one more time through this. As Fp mentioned back in the day, his goal was to make the core of the true believers. Because not the community needs to stand straight when shit rain flows over their heads. We already saw the shit storm after the AD. I think Team will find a Option for S2 AD as they found a really good solution for No cloud left behind.

4 Likes

good post and good food for thought. Thanks for making this

4 Likes

I understand what you want, in my mind S2 means we all start from ground zero on an equal foot, meaning someone coming at S2 with his full bag may never be able to catch up to someone who held during S1 and didn’t play S2, feels kinda sad If I look at sanctum S2 as a game. :cloud:

I don’t know if it will be looked at as a game or as a tool. :cloud:

I would just give a bonus to those who held during S1 but not bringing all the xp they managed to obtain during S1.

But I totally understand your point of view ! Let’s see how they tackle this issue :partly_sunny:

4 Likes

i agree the season xp should be reset and start from scratch points wise, i half suspect that capital earnest will be a seperate claim similar to the og earnest from the 1st season

just imagine the uproar if the top few from last season still hold all their LSTs and their points got carried over

6 Likes

The “retroactive EXP in S2” isnt a matter of S1 EXP being dragged over to Season 2, but rather that TVL*duration for Sanctum LSTs earned from S1 END up until Season 2 START should be retroactively given.

As in if 1 SOL gives 1 EXP per day, then at S2 launch, users should receive 1 EXP per SOL for every day they have held since S1 finished.

Just replying as I see there are a few others as well who seem to have misunderstood what I was pointing to. I am not in favor of dragging S1 points over to S2, even though it would probably benefit myself. I want a “fresh start” too, but that TVL contribution since S1 snapshot is included and not just from the date that Wonderland 2 is launched.

5 Likes

You’re over thinking this, if you are promoting Sanctum by providing information, helping other users, actively pushing others to get involved how is that gaming, its genuine and considered earnest if its done consistently. We’re still a very small community highlighted by having only 203 users vote on the forum proposals. There is not an army of Sybil trying to be ‘earnest’ only genuine community members at this point (as far as I can tell).

This opinion is only predicated from other projects gaming users and jeeting on them at the first chance.
This is not the case for sanctum for a number of reasons, they having been building this product for over 3 years and considered a token back in 2021 but put it off. The team sold the tokens at the same mcap they sold to investors. They are currently retroactively giving users who appealed against not being earnest a 2nd chance and reviewing applicants to award them in January. The team have been transparent about airdrop distributions but deliberately held back specific criteria to make it ungamable. After these considerations its unjustified to think the team have gamed the community, this is further more reflected in price holding above $0.4 and bouncing off the presale price of $0.15. There is little selling.

I implore you to see some reason, this is not a team hurting their user base or even jeeting on users for financial gain. The team consistently delivers and only want to make sure that liquid staking within Solana is successful and does not suffer a similar fate as Ethereum.

Appreciate your post nevertheless

4 Likes

I can agree here if we’re only talking about the forum but when you factor in discord and social users there are many people that farming is their full-time job and they’re doing everything they can to game the system even if it’s just tagging cloud in post or saying GM every day in discord just to boost their post count or daily activity.

You have what I said misunderstood if you think I was saying Sanctum is doing this. I was merely pointing out that anything less than 100% transparency about the formula for airdrops, after the fact, always leads to many people feeling slighted and turns anything people can’t explain into conspiracies of team misconduct even if there’s nothing nefarious going on. Transparency after the airdrop explaining exactly how everyone’s allocations were determined is the only way to avoid this.

I’m the realist than leans pessimistic. I expect the worst of people in this sector because I’ve been here for over a decade and have seen that most times people will do anything to pump their bags or get clout even at the expense of others or their reputation. Because of that I go into situations looking for everything that can go wrong and how to avoid it instead of looking at what can go right and dealing with the negative after the fact.

I’m super bullish on Sanctum, evidenced by my 60k+ $CLOUD, if I thought the team was up to no good then I wouldn’t stick around.

5 Likes

I like this idea too. I suggested a bonus multiplier for days held between season 1 and 2 but I can also get behind having that many days EXP added to season 2. It basically rewards them as if season 2 started on the day season 1 ended. It’s a decent idea and does reward people that held without expecting reward.
I think it should be limited to INF personally though. All other LSTs already have their incentives from other places but INF is the actual Sanctum LST so holding it shows dedication to the project.

2 Likes

Agreed, having been here a decade too I just do not see this team fits that description one bit.

60k isn’t enough, you need 600k!

4 Likes

If I had the means, I would definitely have 600K. Maybe one day I’ll have that kind of play money laying around :wink:

2 Likes

Gmoutai.

Thank you for this suggestion.

I agree that counting those who hold LSTs before, during, or after Wonderland Season would indicate genuine commitment.

There are two reasons for this:

  • It shows you care about the product, holding it beyond Wonderland solely for the reward.
  • By holding consistently, you contribute to the ecosystem.

Technically, implementing this is challenging, but the best and fairest solutions often are.

They would need to verify wallets (which they have the infrastructure for, as they retroactively rewarded points to people who held LSTs prior to Season 1). However, they would also have to track all on-chain LST transactions, which is a more complex task.

For example, while I hold LSTs, one of the core ideas behind liquid staking tokens is liquidity. I often place my LSTs in various products to provide liquidity. Therefore, they would need to check every pool such as those on ORCA, Meteora, or Raydium that holds LSTs and identify the wallets participating in those pools.

In my opinion, tracking LSTs within these products is even more important than simply holding them in a wallet, as the main purpose of LSTs is to remain liquid and support liquidity across the ecosystem.

4 Likes