Staking mechanism after end of 3-year rewards

With the migration to a Layer 2, we launched the new LSK staking system for which 24M LSK are distributed to token holders staking LSK over 3 years after the migration (for details see the Lisk documentation or this technical documentation on GitHub). The purpose of this staking program funded by newly minted LSK is to bridge the gap between the L1 staking model and future mechanisms of sharing economic revenue captured by the Lisk Chain with token holders, for instance, via decentralized sequencing or preconfirmations. The research on possible mechanisms of reward sharing are ongoing, but still at an early stage. Creating a sustainable mechanism that delivers clear long-term utility for the LSK token is a top priority for our internal research efforts. As soon as we have more to share on this topic, we will post it in the forum for community feedback.

The main topic I wanted to raise here and get feedback on is how to best handle the end of the 3-year staking program and possible transition to a different reward system.

At the moment, users can already stake for 2 years, i.e., beyond the end of the current staking program. What we would like to avoid is that users continue to have their LSK locked, but they don’t receive any staking rewards any more after the rewards run out. For this scenario, the staking smart contract already has a switch that can be activated by the Lisk Security Council which removes the penalty for fast unlocking. This means any LSK holder can unlock their LSK within 3 days with no penalty.

In principle, allowing this fast unlocking can also create some risks to the Lisk DAO as stakeholders in the Lisk DAO don’t have a commitment to hold LSK long-term any more. For instance, an attacker can potentially impact a vote in the Lisk DAO and unlock directly after voting to sell their tokens. Generally, I would assess this risk to be rather small as long as we have a sufficiently large amount of LSK staked (e.g., 20+M LSK) because the attacker will not be able to buy or sell such a large amount of tokens in a short time without severely impacting the market. Additionally, in order to keep staking rewards and voting power fairly distributed, we could make it a default in the UI that staking positions are paused (and therefore receive a boost in voting power) and any amount staked beyond the end of staking rewards is automatically staked for the maximum duration to receive maximal staking rewards.

The main question I want to raise here is: In order to make the staking program predictable for all LSK holders, should we already make the commitment to activate fast unlocking without any penalty at the end of the 3-year staking program? If we agree on this commitment, then we can also add this information to the documentation and LSK staking interface. Additionally, we can already plan for adjustments to the staking UI regarding the pause option and suggested staking duration.

3 Likes

Yes, I’m in favor of having the base case be that the locked LSK will be unlockable without a penalty at the end of the period. This gives us the flexibility to explore and align on alternative options in the meantime.

To increase demand and reduce selling pressure, it would be key to have an even stronger LSK utility and channel the majority of value and incentives through it. I can imagine an stLSK version that earns some base reward (potentially in exchange for taking some risk) and can be used across the Lisk space as collateral in DeFi protocols.

1 Like

I agree with the idea of Fast Unlocks, however I will recommend a 21 days default unlock period with zero penalties while applying varying penalties for instant unlocks based on the already existing formula.

A more important issue to address is staking incentives at the end of the 3-year program.
How do we encourage the community to keep staking and participating in governance??

I’ve developed a few models based on best practices across EVM and nonEVM chains, and I am confident that we can create a sustainable alternative to keep the wheels running even after we exhaust the allocated 24M LSK rewards.

2 Likes

Apt!

I’ve always been of the opinion to create more utility and move away from LSK-based incentives. Like most ecosystems, once the native token has more (defi) utility, new projects naturally gravitate towards it, adding more use-cases and providing recurring revenue (rewards) for holders and stakers.

I proposed this a while back and have even gone on to bootstrap a project to validate this. It works, we’ve seen a similar playbook successfully implemented in ecosystems like Solana and Injective etc.

1 Like