Yup Burning Mechanism

📜 Proposals
#21

Wait!

You want to encourage people to sell YUP so they pay less for the rating?

It’s the opposite, whoever has less YUP should pay more and thus insentivize people to buy YUP and do HOLD by charging less to the one who has more YUP in his possession.

If you want the price of YUP to increase you must look for ways to make people want to buy it, if your idea is implemented they will buy rating and they will sell the YUP they earn in the week because it makes no sense to keep them and increase the amount in power to pay more.

Because if they are going to charge more to those who have more YUP it doesn’t make sense.

3 Likes
#22

What do you think about the idea of ​​using yup’s profile as a social network, and having the possibility to obtain ‘premium’ backgrounds and avatars that are paid with Yup?

I know that this would be cosmetic, but over time you could create a kind of wall or tab where we could comment or share the things that we have curated or created, and thus make the profiles more relevant.

8 Likes
#23

The same can also be a conjunction of NFT characterized for it, this can also be applicable what I suggested at a certain moment → What possibility is to be NFT Native to give another usefulness to the Token Yup? and there it would be more than cosmetic, it would become essential

5 Likes
#24

a mechanism for token burning has to be determined.

Starting by fixing the influence of new users, because it is not fair that a new user in 1 month I have better influence and earn more reward than a user who has more than 3, 5 9 months in the project.

because they are users who are entering, they see that they are earning yup quickly and sell, they are not interested in the project, they only see that they are earning yup quickly and sell, besides selling, the influence does not fall, it does not affect them, but continue to earn the same amount of yup or more yup.

it is not fair to the rest of the community that makes hold, because those who are selling the most every day, are new users.

There has to be a penalty where the one who is selling every day, is penalized with the influence, because that is one of the ways to encourage new users, that if they sell, they will see that their influence was affected and their rewards, for having sold every day.

new investors can come in and raise the price, but if new curators continue to come in, who after 15-30 days will sell and continue to earn the same, the price will continue to fall.

before the migration, when someone new started curating they would start getting 100 YUP, in an estimated time between 1 or 2 months. The one who starts today with 3 or 4 days already starts earning 100 yup. and when he has more than 6 days he starts earning 400YUP 600YUP.

Is it fair ? no, it is not. because there are users who have 3, 6 or 9 months, and earn much less, and having more yup in the wallet than a new user.

the idea is with all these good ideas that you have contributed, that they are realized so that the token has UTILITY, and that utility is on a daily basis.

thank you very much for your attention @PBJ @nir

7 Likes
#25

Wow, thats really Nice what you said mr/s. Agree with you

#26

Agreed with you brother, before migration thing was like this as you said. Who are selling very frequently their influence are not dropping relevantly and only that’s the thing is encouraging them to sell more.

2 Likes
#27

Ys bro you are right :+1:

#28

there are some solid ideas here but not sure they are strong enough to implement:

  • fees on random parts of the product (to like, to make collections, etc.) while potentially driving demand will just kill use. We don’t have enough demand for usage to start charging people like this
  • older users earning less than new users isn’t a bug it’s a feature if those older users are voting inaccurately. Many of you asked us to stop collusion but want to continue to have more influence → more time? this is problematic.
  • adding a penalty for sales doesn’t make much sense. A lot of this is just tricks and ladders to prevent people from selling and those have rarely worked. We have to work on product not just create fees
4 Likes
#29

we’re looking to implement something closer to Ethereum’s burn mechanism:

  1. Like Fee (F): Introduce a fee associated with likes. Every like (V) would have a tiny fee. Users don’t pay this upon giving each like (would be txn heavy / annoying to sign), but is subtracted upon settling rewards.
    a. That fee might depend on their earning potential F = ?
  • F_sum = FV + F_debt (F_debt explained below)
  1. Settlement upon Reward Distribution: At the point of curator reward distribution (daily), the protocol settles a user’s rewards (R_gross) against their ‘debts’ of all the likes they gave (rewards - fees), burns the fees, and only distributes net rewards (R_net). R_net = R_gross - F_sum
    a. If they have more fees than rewards, they earn nothing that day and the remaining debt (F_remaining) rolls over to the next day. They only start earning once they’ve cleared that debt, till then everything they’re supposed to earn gets burned
    • F_debt = R_net_sum_previous - F_sum_previous - dB
    • R_net = R_gross - (F_sum + F_debt)
  2. Debt Repayment: Users can also pay off their debt at a discount (d) (let’s say 50%) by burning YUP (B) they already own or purchased.
4 Likes
#30

This is a good beginning!

#31

It doesn’t make sense if I vote for something and nobody else votes for it that they increase my influence in this case the activity, I still think that if I vote for something and nobody else votes for it they punish me by lowering my raw influence, correct me if I’m wrong.

I am not asking to increase my influence magically by voting things that nobody else does, I know that if I vote 30 things that nobody else votes I will not receive a reward, but if they take away my raw influence and tell me that I am voting wrong, now I understand how every day more users become new accounts and are supported with multiple accounts to vote good, increase their raw influence and earn better rewards.

If there is no way to penalize collusion the YUP protocol will be used by less and less single users and will be the paradise of the multiaccounts, I just know that the time will come where economically speaking curating content will not be profitable for those users who have multiple accounts, but I know that first the unique users will surrender to see that having an account is not profitable and only those who have more than one account will benefit.

And I know that if you the YUP team find a solution for this problem (I hope you do at some point) it will be the time when the protocol will be attractive to many other people and can be implemented to prevent abuses in other protocols and not only for those who came for easy money.

And YES, I am for the rewards, I am in YUP because it attracts my attention to be rewarded for my likes and at this moment I don’t want to be a sheep and be voting where most of them do it just to earn YUP no matter if I like a NFT or not, because I know that in the end the YUP score of those NFTs are worthless since everyone is voting just to earn YUP and not for what they like.

2 Likes
#32

Voting stuff that nobody will vote for will affect your activity (which is a component of the raw influence) the token age is not affected.

But in general, it is tough for an old user to have a high activity anyway.

Replacing activity with yup-score is an idea that I personally like.

Multi accounts are hard to solve the easiest solution is KYC, from what I’ve heard PoH will be available on side chains too, which will mean it would be much easier, cheap, and frictionless for users to register so if enough support for that exists maybe at some point that will be used to effectively end multi-accounts.

3 Likes
#33

I suggest making it hard to earn rewards. After all, Yup is giving away free money. There is no harm in collecting KYC data. It will limit the multi-account problem for the time being.

Say whatever you like, KYC may not look web3 fashion, but it is the only way. We can not wait for PoH to be available on sidechains.

We will attach every Yup profile with a unique KYC dataset. If needed, I will match the wallets and KYC data for Yup manually. But please, implement something.

Start with blocking ALL the known accounts of the people with multiple accounts. Just like the old times, blacklist the addresses and accounts from receiving the rewards.

2 Likes