Following the result of the snapshot “Options to give more utility to the well token” where 72.02% of the community said they would like to have a tier system I’m taking the first step to discuss this is more detail.
My opinion is to build the tier system in two steps.
I would recommend first to build the tier system and then when it’s live and working as expected to start discussing which are the privileges/rewards for each tier. To simplify the implementation in the first phase I would recommend for the users have a badge in website indicating which is their tier level.
High level requisites for this first phase
Back-end requirements
3 tier level based on the staked well in the safety module. (Still can be discussed if the community prefers to be based in well holdings instead of the well staked in the safety module, in my opinion I would prefer the well staked because it shows more commitment to the project)
The details of the 3 tiers go as the following:
The bronze tier should be when the user has less than 400000 well staked in the safety module.
The platinum tier should be when the user has more than 400000 well staked in the safety module but less than 1000000 well
The gold tier should be when the user has more than 1000000 well staked in the safety module
The user tier is calculated everyday at 00:00 UTC time
The information of the tier of the user should be saved and updated in a storage so it can be used by the FE to display the user tier.
The user tier calculation should take into account the well staked in all chains (currently it’s only possible to stake in moonbeam, but if we open staking in the future in the base chain the two amounts should be calculated)
This means the tier calculation is per wallet and not per chain.
Front-end requirements
In the top bar of the website we should present a clickable badge of the tier the user belongs to.
This information is only presented when the user connects his wallet.
When the user clicks on that badge we would be able to see the additional information
The amount of well staked
The information of the tiers
A explicit note saying that tier level is calculated everyday at 00:00 UTC time.
As you might know I’m an individual contributor from the moonwell community so I would like to request some help from technical team that has been working in the moonwell project to check if this implementation is feasible and if they can do this implementation. I’ll be always available to help on any question that you might have and if needed I can go to a call to discuss this in more detail.
Also, I would like to apologize for any behavior that I might have add in the past, but I like the project so much that I would like for the community also being part of some features to be implemented in the future, and not only 3rd party companies, so that’s why I had some frustration on the past.
I will not create any snapshot proposal, until this well discussed in the moonwell forum, but I would like to have some engagement from the community as well from the technical contributors of moonwell.
I recommend a tier model similar to Radiant that encourages staking WELL in a new safety module:
-If you stake at least 10% of your supplied value, you can claim 100% of rewards
-If you stake less, you can claim a smaller share, and the rewards you don’t claim go to the Safety Module, increasing the amount earned by other stakers
Less is more. 3x tiers is too complex. Should be based on % of supplied value. Not based on a pre-defined quantity of WELL. I do not recommend naming tiers Bronze, Platinum, Gold. Doesn’t align with branding and keeping things simple for the UI/user experience. We have to keep in mind how this will be seamlessly implemented and explained into the new website/design/UI without clutter. The simpler it can be explained to a new retail user with no DeFi experience onboarding Base for the first time, the better.
Migrating to Base should still remain top priority. We should not rush through utility without it being properly thought through including feedback from the devs and website developers.
The goal of this topic is to align as a community how tiers should be defined and not what will be the rewards/incentives of each tier, this can be done in a later phase.
In my honest opinion I don’t think 3 tiers is too complex, the naming of the tiers of course can be changed, it was just a suggestion to start the discussion, as also the layout that I provided. I don’t agree that the tiers to be based on a % of your supplied value because it there might be cases that the user has an amount really low in well but it’s has staked most of it, it will be in a higher tier that an user that has a lot of supply but doesn’t stake.
I see the tiers like a premium feature, the more you invest in the project the high tier you are, for example like netflix where you have 3 tiers (basic,standard and premium) based on the amount you pay/invest. As higher the tier the best the rewards/incentives.
While staking is important, so is incentivizing the community to create LP. So we shouldn’t punish those who are contributing to the health of the protocol who choose to create LP with their WELL rather than stake the majority of them. Hence why 10% of supplied value makes far more sense than quantity staked. 2x options also makes more sense than 3x options to choose from. Either you stake 10% or you don’t. And if you don’t, you get less rewards. And those who do get more rewards. Couldn’t be more simple! Would love to hear feedback from others on this topic as we continue to narrow down our potential options.
While the suggestion and conversation here is good & you both make good points; i think a hybrid variation of your points would make most sense.
Tier 1: 50,000-500,000
Tier 2: 500,000-2,000,000
Tier 3: 500,000-2,000,000
Tier 4: 2,000,000 - 5,000,000
Tier 5: 5,000,000+
You want to have a high level Tier that incentivises constant accumulation, that way less dumping and more buying by whale sized users.
The tiers should be triggered by the amount of WELL a wallet is holding, not how much its staking.
That gives people flexibility to choose if they want to borrow, supply, stake or provide to LP. Every facet is important in a DeFi system and this way you avoid skewing it all to far for one section of the DeFi ecosystem.
The Tiers should trigger the following benefits which improve based on tier level:
Better Borrow Rates
Better Supply Rates
Better LP Rates
Better Staking Rates
This would be the best solution from a pumpanentals perspective , as well as attracting users with deeper pockets, HODLers and accumulators alike.
Hi guys, I’m back from vacation, and I’m glad to see that there has been progress in enhancing the utility of the Well token. However, I’m a bit surprised to see a tier system being implemented. Don’t you think a system like Radiant Capital’s is more attractive and efficient? Personally, I believe we should lean more towards a system like that; it makes more sense to me. What do you think? We should work to implement a new system quickly for the benefit of all. Let’s wrap up this discussion and send a proposal for an on-chain vote promptly. Let’s all discuss it here together
Yield farming on Base wil grow, Base is new and with coinbase affiliation with BlackRock they’ll bring in liquidity and yield farming is where liquidity goes in the form of staking,with this being said , i think it is imperative for Moonwell to figure out a Revenue share system for their toke $WELL so the tokens doesn’t act like a Farm & Dump Protocol. new to the tier system topic just a noob trying to understand it all, but what i’m saying is there should be more utility to the token in form of a revenue share
Given the limited interactions regarding this subject, I propose to simply fork Radiant Capital. What do you think about it? It’s a system that works well to add value to the governance token. Can someone from the team or an experienced individual tell us if it’s possible to do this quickly?
Luke shared in the discord that they will post some drafts next month
I still think its to early to make „groundbreaking“ ( hint: kusamarian:person_facepalming:t2:) changes for well, rather focus full on the base deployment and explore possible collabs, growing tvl & dex liquidity.
In this market environment, no one is interested anyway and 2nd, no one understands it… for me it is more important to first build up as many users & tvl as possible.
User -> tvl ->token price
I see it more of a risk if the token „change“ doesn’t have the desired effect
token „changes“ is exactly something you can try out as often as you like on Apollo
I Disagree, we should continue building regardless of the market conditions. The base deployment has indeed been successful, and I don’t see what more we can expect from that side. I believe that adding utility to the token is an absolute priority, and that’s what will attract more TVL and partnerships. Radiant Capital managed to thrive on its own during a bear market, and even in the current conditions, they still have significant TVL.
We won’t attract new users with the same concept. The community has voted for a change, and we need to take action as soon as possible. Liquidity on Aerodrome is already more than sufficient. I don’t see how we can attract more users without making changes to the aging protocol. Innovation, as demonstrated by Radiant Capital, is the reason for their success. Giants like Compound and Aave are already leading the market, so we must innovate to capture a larger market share
lets wait for the drafts from the moonwell contributors
imo its a marathon, specially the base chain has the potential to really bring mio ppl to web3, not sure about the polkadot plans but i dont like just a (asap) copy/paste from another protocol…if i want the radiant token use case i could just invest in radiant token. radiant has almost 10x tvl.
and market conditions have a big impact, the price volatility of the last few weeks would have happened anyway, with or without a new use case. i would love to see first the base tvl (360m) grow to 2b+ and hopefully we can catch the train to grow our tvl as well and build a strong moonwell base. after that and when we see a clear uptrend i would release a killer feature for the $well token. rn the chances are high for just a short term price volatility with a new usecase and after the next crash, the interest of the ppl for well token is the same like before.
We have no idea what the new drafts in question will be. I’m not saying we should simply copy, but no one is bringing real ideas, and since Moonwell is a DAO, changes should come from the community, not the team. I don’t think they will bring about real change; change must come from the community through a vote. The time it will take to implement these ideas will probably be more than a month, which is why I’m trying to find solutions now.
We can’t continue with this system for the Well token, the high inflation, farming, etc. I think we all hold Well tokens in the hope that they will increase in value, so we need to act accordingly and not just wait for the team.
I think some factors will play a role in a new token design, like compliance etc… I’m not an expert in this, nor a developer, I’m just sharing my opinion like you
There is no Moonwell “team”, many contributors like Gauntlet or Warden, they are experts in the field…i’m happy to wait for their ideas.
ignore the polkadot community fud about moon$well, we survived 2 bridge hacks and we are still the most successful dotsama project they are losers
Oh, this isn’t the Polkadot community. I don’t really like the Kusamarian guys; they’re living off governance and don’t bring anything exceptional to Polkadot. I suppose they’re just cozying up to whales to get their votes. Moonwell is currently the most successfu DeFi project on Polkadot, and we should keep going in that direction. I’m convinced that bringing something new and innovative will take us far in DeFi.
I still think the proposal I suggested above is a happy medium - did anyone have a chance to read it?
I think it will provide the best tokenomic structure for price growth but also in bringing real utility to the $WELL token as well as gamifying the concept of HODLing and collecting as much WELL as possible.
I would back the proposal I suggested with 25,000,000 WELL of voting power immediately to get it pushed through ASAP.
That way we get the change in quick as the bull market will kick in 6-9 months time, better to have this stuff in place before the bull market kicks in - as that’s when most adoption happens. If you can onboard enough critical mass during the hype cycles, you become a mainstay in the crypto space.
Glad to see the community engaged in this topic I created.
I generally I am in favor of what the user gtra8 proposed, maybe 5 tiers is too much (that’s why I proposed only 3) but I agree with the rest.
I understand that we should copy success stories(like radiant capital) but I think its more important to follow an innovative path to start distinguish from other projects.
Maybe i dont get it or i‘m to stupid but how can a tier system & current purpose of the safety module work in the long term ?
If the purpose of the safety module remains, a Well buyback must occur at some point
My solution would be a token buyback or revenue sharing, but I doubt these are compliant
Glad if a new run starts next year but i still think we should focus on the base deployment and maybe explore crosschain lending before some token changes
And we can make changes like that or even more experimental things on Apollo first…no need to rush things on Artemis, especially if you think a new run is starting next year, you’d better not ruin anything right before
( hint: kusamarian:person_facepalming:t2:) changes for well, rather focus full on the base deployment and explore possible collabs, growing tvl & dex liquidity.
-> tvl 
6-9months 
but i still think we should focus on the base deployment and maybe explore crosschain lending before some token changes 
