Yeah, crystal clear
1 Like
Iāll shim in one more time.
First, and for-must this is all about guarding the currency SFX from ghost wallets period !
Nothing else !
Second, is to achieve this in the most simple unobtrusive fair matter possible.
This is not about worries about how active or inactive SFT holders will be.
My view of a best implementation of this safeguard is;
1- a claiming system.
That means that after locking in SFT, there still needs to be a claim made for SFX to get inside the private wallet.
2- a reasonable (to be determined) max period of time locked SFT earn SFX, it starts at first locking and is reset at every claim being made.
3- after max period is reached, locked SFT stop earning SFX, and now enter a grace period (lets say 6 months) awaiting to be claimed.
After no claim being made past the grace period, they are returned at the same rate they were accumulated, back into the system, but can still be stopped by a claim for what would be remaining at the time of the claim.
So if this was so;
I first lock in my SFT, they start earning SFX for max (2y).
At anytime I choose, inside that (2y) I make a claim for the SFX to become in my possession inside my wallet.
The (2y) always gets pushed back (reset) every-time I make a claim, be that daily, weekly, monthly, yearly,ā¦
This way the system is protected from GW, but also your locked SFT donāt stop earning SFX unless something bad happens + you get a lot of time to collect if you somehow fix the problem, and also you have just regained the ability to earn SFX again and a healthy SFX !
Some might say it is not OK to take back the SFX.
First they are not claimed, second it is no worst then stopping locked SFT from earning more SFX after a period.
I think everyone would be a winner with a system like this.
No grace period, imagine if btc was designed like that, would have been a complete shitshow. I agree for the sake of collective good to stem ghost wallets with a keep alive function, unlock an relock yearly or whatever interval of time will be chosen. There is no actual need to take back a single lock period of sfx. I dont think any math model would suggest that will be a danger for liquidity if that would happen.
Less restriction there will be better it is, none of us like coercion in real life and i dont see why we should rack oneās brains to impose limits and conditions if there isnt a real need of it.
3 Likes
What your really against is the claim system ?
āunlock an relock yearly or whatever interval of time will be chosen.ā
I would like to know how exactly this would work, so that I can judge it better.
I am also for less restrictions but would like to know how this would be less restricted.
ex; if thereās a monthly keep alive ?
Iām just a little baffled that every body is fine with unlocking someones SFT essentially depriving them for however long that period might be.
Again I stress, this is to safeguard against GW.
If the numbers show the danger is minimal, we can come up with a fair less restricted deal.
Donāt get upset, wereās just brainstorming on this 
1 Like
We were discussing about that in order to avoid the possibility to lose a massive amount of Sfx in dead locked wallets. And if you lock you will have to periodically unlock and lock it again to keep collecting SFX. You suggested to take back SFX if such person that already is not collecting anymore incentives from the network do not claim it in a period of time. I say that such move is unfair. Itās complicated to enforce and it doesnāt solve a problem. We are not here to take what is rightfully under others property.
2 Likes
The difference is that with a method you are not allowing people to get more SFX if they do not say: hey I havenāt lost my wallet itās all ok. With the other you are taking back 1 or 2 years of their effort without their consent. Itās basically robbery.
2 Likes
I get it I do.
But it is not as cut and dry, witch one is better if we make scenarios.
(I would like to find something in between).
(My system can also just let the SFX stay unclaimed indef.)
Imagine thereās a monthly keep aliveā¦ you get in a car accident and your out for 6m.
You get deprived real quick of SFX without your consent !
ānot allowing people to get more SFXā
How is this better ?
See what Iām saying.
We have to find a balance that just achieves a safeguard and no more.
What Iām really doing right now is to get people to flesh out their arguments.
The pros and the consā¦
And get better understanding myself.
1 Like
Itās better because one is not depriving you of what you already collected the second is already doing this and potentially taking your earned incentives too, itās not about pros and cons if you consider math. There is no need to do take back dividends, what would be the point? Greed?
1 Like
The keep alive interval wont be so little, not 3months not 6, minimum 1year if in a whole year you are not capable to to a simple unlock and lock again you do not collect anymore divs but nobody can wipe away the collected ones.
p.s coma, death, etc are extreme conditions and we should not take this examples in to legitimate a decision that take place on people acting different the vast majority of time. in my opinion.
3 Likes
I agree, if there is no need !
I feel both extremes have been expressed, and I wanted both sides to be happy !
But I donāt want to be on one extreme.
Some have been pushing the keep alive as a toolā¦going beyond what is needed.
2 Likes
in the most ideal situation, the better would be taking automatic incentives payout every day for ever.
but itās not technically doable and would put at risk the emissiom of sfx
having to keep alive the collection of sfx sounds reasonable.
Imagine this (extreme example) i lock my safex token on day one i live alone and go to coma for 2 years when I woke i found that i collected only one year of incentives, but at least i still have 1 ready and in my possession. would be worse to find out i have none and start again from 0
2 Likes
To be fair to my idea;
You are allowed to collect up to 2y.
If you wake up from the coma at 2.5y you get a full 2yās worth.
If you wake up at 3y you get 1.5y worth.
If you wake up at 4y you still get 1y worth.
Only if you wake up after 5y do you lose.
These are just ideasā¦
Imagine if we stopped it, and left a 1y worth to be claimed ?
So after 10y in a coma you still could get a 1yā¦
Remember you were allowed to get to 2y and not stopped at 1yā¦
Again this is just brainstormingā¦
In an effort to try and achieve almost zero loss to the system etc.
I donāt cling to the idea of putting back, if there is no need for it to keep SFX healthy and strong.
I can think complicatedā¦ but I am for something simple but most of all fair !
1 Like
I think it would way too complicate to manage this way, technically I mean
1 Like
Probably not even doable !
I came up with it because there was talk of a claimingā¦
1 Like
Iām with Eddie on this approach.
Extreme scenario 1: collecting for eternity after lock in. Least effort for the network. Good for holders. Not good for SFX ecosystem.
Extreme scenario 2: automatic unlock and ātake awayā SFX after some time. Way more effort for the network (consistent calculations of the claimed and taken away SFX mandatory). Not good for holders. Good for SFX ecosystem.
Middle scenario: automatic stop of collecting SFX after some time. Collected SFX are not taken away. Less effort for the network than scenario 2. Okay for holders. Good for SFX ecosystem - > Good.
P. S. : We must not forget that there will be a tail emission after one billion coins are regularly mined. This will make up for some lost or ghost collected SFX. Only ghosts collecting forever and beyond would be a harm.
5 Likes
Couldnāt have been worded better.
Middle scenario sounds the best. Just the timer shouldnāt be too short. And SXF can be claimed anytime to reset the countdown.
4 Likes
Some people may also opt into custody situations: if you store sft in exchanges then you should be able to lock-in with the exchange. And they do the keep alive. So if you did end up in a coma for 3 years whatever, and the exchange was reputable then youād still have all of all balances. So a keep alive 2-5 years seems reasonable considering all things that could go wrong that you canāt access the private key to get a keep alive broadcast out. Yet you can always access the accrued amount.
With this we can establish a minimum participation rate since there is now an can be participating for at least this long
1 Like
Just wondering how you can lock in coins if they are on the exchange since technically the exchange own the sft and only promise to give you them back after you finished trading minus those you lost in trading (or give those you gained).
Since on the exchange they have to assume you are trading so they cannot lock them in either since people could withdraw them in real time.
2 Likes
They could be used as lending on a futures market