They would stay in limbo
I think a lot of good info was put on the table from a number of angles. Anyone new could read through and drop their two cents as well. Otherwise we revisit as thoughts come up or after implemented.
2 Likes
OK thanks again.
If it was possible I would not be against getting those sfx back.
I donāt know enough of the mechanics to work out a solution !
But ethically I donāt see a problem with.
If thereās is a need to claim that is not met.
To stay as fair as possible it could be redistributed incrementally.
Thatās it.
1 Like
Obviously, it is like Dan has stated and makes the most sense. You either collect SFX or stop collecting SFX. However, collected SFX will NEVER leave a wallet or be redistributed without the owners approval ever. So no ghost wallets will be robbed by their holdings ever. This would be a mess because an owner could always find his keys again after several years. Loads of ideas were gathered and discussed, now we can look forward to how it will practically work out.
4 Likes
Obviously I was thinking it would not be in the wallet until you collected them.
I was thinking the claiming system would work like that.
But thatās OK we have to live with what we have.
1 Like
Whilst on the topic of locking/unlocking, will there be a method of being able to check how many tokens in total are locked in on the network as a whole?
5 Likes
Personally I wouldnāt have an issue if the system held onto SFX until claimed so that they could be redistributed to active SFT holders if they are not claimed in time. Seems like preference should be given to the flow of SFX over the preference of SFT holders to be minimally involved. I think this would naturally drive away those looking to be extremely hands off and bring in those who are more engaged which in the early days can only benefit the ecosystem.
I would also favor a shorter claims period than a longer one, because if we have too many people coming in once every two years to liberate a bunch of āhostageā SFX they could have unpredictable and wild influences on the market. Quarterly seems like a decent compromise, since thatās how often stock dividends are paid.
2 Likes
Absolutely not, if I lock I deserve that SFX for the period of time my sft stays locked. would drive people away and be too tricky too risky.
3 Likes
I dont think people will deliberately lock their sft, and do not ever collect those dividends over and over for multiple years
@Rich.bate something like a direct pull explore.safex.io/api/lockedsft would be cool.
Concerning the other aspect I agree with Eddie. Once you lock, those coins should be reserved for you even if you miss the deadline. It should only auto stop the collecting at deadline. Also, it would be more complicated to decide on how to redistribute those not claimed coins among the others. More complicated than it already is.
3 Likes
We discussed today, and solidified: it does work like that for the period that youāre locked you keep those sfx. Just not after the period of ghost status
7 Likes
Gotta love this man 
2 Likes
exactly, itās unfair and complicated for nothing. we can afford to lose the circulation 1year of dividends on a 20 year emission rate. Itās impossible to avoid people losing coins so for that reason after 20y there always will be a small block reward to compensate lost coins.
2 Likes
Further to that, itād be great if the emission of dividends was measurable, perhaps a website that can monitor it graphically would be cool.
1 Like
the amount of $ SFT # SAFEX Token locked in directly contributes to the amount of # SafexCash being pumped out as # dividends , the more locked in as well as the sales volume = more rewards . One could say locking in transfers value to $ SFX . locking or unlocking will directly effects the demand/price for # safexcash just something to put in perceptive with this topic
1 Like
I donāt see how people needing to keep alive their wallets is unfair
Itās not against any rules or previous promises. yes it was known that tokens have to be locked in to receive incentives but i see it as the precise proces in this was yet to be determined. and that is why we need to discuss it now.
And i dont feel any holder/invenstor should automatically be entitled to a care free life of passive income. i know it would be nice to have money comming in without worries. but take this in consideration:
in our normal non-crypto life we have all kinds of income, priveleges, entitlements, property, insurance, savings.when one dies all of income and priveleges are stopped or lost, and all our properties and savings are transfered to our relatives. this is all taken care of by a system of regulation/law or notorial deeds or contracts. My bank is one of the first ones to know if I die. When iām a dead man i wont have an active stock-exchange-acccount with receiving dividends. When i die my account is beeing closed and my stocks are sold or transfered to my wife. In life i donāt need to wory about this (i donāt need to keep my savings account alive) because i know it will go to my wife when i die.
We donāt have that in crypto. So we canāt tell, and we donāt have a way of knowing by the system, whether someone died or is just somewhat inactive or on a very long holiday or in a hospital. So people need to take care of their entitlements and property by themselfs. And need to think of a way of transferring them in case of death. So ākeep aliveā may sound unneccesary complicated but its inherent to and a result of the people wanting things back into control and take care of themselfs, in stead of a controlling system.
Yes it would be shit when i get into a coma for 3 years and after that i would have to find out i did not get any SFX. So if I dont want that to happen, i need to be sure my wife also knows how this shit works. If you donāt have a wife you make a manual, put you keys in it, put it a locker at a bank, and make sure it gets to the right person if something happens.
I think we all agree that when someone dies and is collecting huge amounts of SFX would be a bad thing. So we need a system like this. Sure al claimed SFX are yours. But we have to stop ghost accounts from collecting huge amounts.
Besides that. Things change. Protocols can change, rules, technology.
When my bank changes something in their userpolicy, or their need to send me a new card, they send me letter. Since in the safex system we donāt have a way of contacting people; we cant reach people if they really need to do something or anything changes.
So i think in crypto, and surely in the safex system, people (users and token holders) should be very aware and involved in whats going on, and take a look at their wallet every now and than.
Some other project iām in is having people sending an opt-in transaction every month. Now that is a bit to much i think. What would be ideal is a 1 year period after my last activity in wallet if that is feasable performance-wise. Otherwise a 6 month or 1 year lockin period is pretty ok i think!
4 Likes
Iād wake up pissed af
However, in that case; some kind of automation solution must be made. And it is personal.
Letās think some more about this before drawing any conclusions. 
All sides of the dice are completely valid in the sense that ghost accounts sink sfx, yet you dont want to miss out. Yetā¦ yetā¦
The good thing is that this is not difficult to enable/disable coding wise. By default we are including this keep alive possibility.
Thoroughly valid points @Thomas
4 Likes
Partly agree, but if we take extreme examples to analyse a possible solution we would never take a decision. Collective is always more important than a extreme and low probability isolated case, SFX going into the void because of a whale forget his private key can hurt more than a guy losing some weeks of dividends, and oh you wonāt lose SFT or already collected SFX it wonāt be a huge loss after all
2 Likes
Personally, I think this shouldnāt be solved in the wallet or by Balkaneum for that matter. This should be a (payable) third party service.
1 Like
I donāt think I understood correctly. even if only 1sft is locked the amount of Sfx payout is the same, only discriminant is volume.
1 Like
sft pays out more sfx depending on sales and how many you lock, thus the value gets transfered in lock mode to sfx
1 Like