Withdrawal Limits Strategy
The Graviton team is constantly working on products and integrations. Our approach focuses on soft releases to ensure quality and security while preventing any single point of failure. After finishing the core part of the Early Bird functionality, many community members have successfully tested staking/withdrawals/LP-Farming and governance voting, while EB withdrawals were limited to 10 GTON/day. Since the end of the EB phase though, almost 35% of the GTON EB allocation has been unlocked and would be available for claims.
While the team’s initial plan was to open up unlimited claims right after the alpha testing phase, new developments, like Pathway, and market dynamics, lead to the reconsideration of these plans and the setup of this very proposal.
We as the DAO will now decide which strategy we should choose to increase the GTON withdrawal limits in the near future.
The proposal contains two strategies, both have its own pros/cons depending on how EB participants will act as a community. This is basically Game Theory in practice, but the team will implement any approach which will be chosen by the token holders.
Option-I. Bi-Weekly Doubling:
We can slowly increase the daily limit each two weeks as follows:
10 (0) → 20 (2) → 40 (4) → 80 (6) → 160 (8) → 320 (10) → 640 (12) → 1280 (14) → 2560 (16) → 5120 (18) → … → Unlimited
Considering the average EB contribution ($14k), the majority of EBs would be able to claim their entire unlocked allocation within 9 weeks, while the biggest single EB contributor would have full access in less than 18 weeks:
At the same time, this approach will prevent any potential market sell shocks and will give us the opportunity to continue growing organically. In our opinion this is also the best strategy to support ‘Pathway’.
Option-II. Unlimited Withdrawals
We’ll open up unlimited withdrawals, as initially planned, but can’t prevent any ‘musical chair’ situation: Some EBs could choose the fast cashout strategy (token has 4x the EB price), which could lead to a big short-term GTON price correction. This correction could in turn have a negative impact on the momentum we have gained in the recent weeks, resulting in a significant slow down of the project’s growth.
In the short term this strategy seems to be more critical and is basically a bet on the GTON community self-organization. Nonetheless, we are prepared for either scenario: after a potential market shock, the project will, with the help of ‘Pathway’, start another cycle of growth with a new audience of DAO token holders. This approach is also good, if we’ll implement EB account migration via NFT tokens and OTC deals with those NFTs (a separate proposal on this matter will be published soon).
Now it is up to the community to discuss both options and vote for one of them. The team’s tokens are locked for 1 year without claims, so from that perspective both options are good to go.
Initially I stated, that my personal opinion is Option-I as the better solution, but after in depth conversations with the team, advisors, ambassadors and EBs, I reconsidered my opinion and am now advocating for Option-II as stated in my post here: Withdrawal Limits Strategy - #22 by alexp