RFP-6 proposes changes to the vesting and locking mechanisms.
Fixed unlock periods create unnecessary FUD. Grouping unlock events into universal weekly epochs creates weird game theory dynamics which aren’t particularly helpful or useful.
As liquid tokens, expired locks should not receive the same treatment as locked RDNT tokens.
It is imperative that Radiant v2 rewards and encourages long-term support of the Radiant protocol in alignment with the Radiant DAO core value of collective benefit.
The following protocol changes are being proposed for v2:
v1 Design
v2 Design Proposal
Rationale
The original v1 locking mechanism is flawed: there is no reason to continue earning locking fees on a token if the lock period has expired. This gives users free optionality by allowing them to keep their tokens in the lock pool and continuing to earn exit penalties and protocol fees—all while having access to their full balance at any time, even after lock expiry.
Users will now have to decide whether or not to re-lock their tokens upon expiration of the lock, as it should be designed.
v1 Design
v2 Design Proposal
Rationale
The "epoch" approach used by Geist Finance produced unintended adverse effects, including large amounts of tokens all unlocking simultaneously.
This grouping also incentivizes users to wait until the last possible second to lock their tokens, as locking them on day 1 vs. day 6 would bucket all of these into the same epoch—which is unfair to those who locked up earlier.
These en masse unlocks created unnecessary FUD, and the batched nature of these unlocks resulted in misaligned incentives. It is more practical to distribute token unlocks over time in line with each individual's vesting schedule than in batches on a weekly basis.
V1 Design
V2 Design Proposal
Rationale
Many users and advisors have noted that the protocol currently does not sufficiently reward longtermism vs. speculative short-term actions.
This extension of the vesting and locking period, coupled with the potential locking of LP tokens on each chain, will create more certainty about liquidity at any given time—and reduce potential risk for investors during "black swan" bank run scenarios.
The protocol should offer greater compensation to investors who choose extended lock periods, while not overlooking those who prefer shorter profiles. To be successful, the protocol must appeal to as broad a range of participants as possible.
Likely some maintenance dev cost, no additional structured costs beyond existing time/resources spent in development.
Implementation would go into effect upon launch of v2, and would deploy on all subsequent Radiant chains (current & future).
Summary of RFP-6 v2 Design Proposals