Reducing the minimum dissolve delay to 3 months

[Gabriel]

I agree with this. In an official DFINITY Medium article from 2021 titled “Getting Started on the Internet Computer’s Network Nervous System App (Wallet),” the team clearly stated:

Users benefit the most if their neuron attains its maximum possible value. When considering the locked neuron, that moment is always “dissolve delay days” in the future, which comes closer every day that a neuron is dissolving. Meanwhile, the long-term success of the network will best be served if neuron owners vote with a long-term view toward maximizing the value of the network in the distant future. For such reasons, the NNS incentivizes neuron owners to make their dissolve periods as high as possible by disbursing greater rewards to neurons the greater their dissolve periods, which can be configured up to eight years.

Link: Get Started Using the NNS Front-End Dapp and ICP Wallet on the Internet Computer | by DFINITY | The Internet Computer Review | Medium

As a result of this incentive structure, a substantial portion of ICP holders (61.5% of staked tokens) locked their tokens for the full 8-year period. These holders now receive approximately 15.6-16.1% in annualized rewards

And now while most of us are locked for 8 years, we would only receive approximately 2x the rewards (15-16%) compared to the proposed 7.66% for 3-month neurons, despite being locked for 32 times longer. This reward-to-lock ratio is extremely unfair to long-term stakers who committed to supporting the network’s stability.

If you want to implement shorter lock periods, I suggest a truly proportional approach based on duration. For example, 3-month staking should start with a much lower rate like 1.1%, with a progressive system where rewards scale more fairly with commitment length, leading up to the maximum return percentage at 8 years. This would properly incentivize longer-term commitment while still offering flexibility to those who need shorter lock periods

[borovan]

@krzysztofzelazko

Also, suggesting an entire country is somehow responsible because a few names show up in your research? That’s just lazy generalization. But this proposal was passed by the community near a year ago, and it’s being implemented as agreed.

I’m saying that the Poland ICP Hub came up a lot when we found out the bad node providers that were breaking the rules. Toronto, Warsaw, Johannesburg and Singapore were top of the list.

[Thyassa]

@infu

Given the track record of less reputable exchanges over the years (ICP is on ~140 CEXes), some will be very likely staking user assets without consent. This will potentially make nICP a highway between CEXes for legal and illegal user asset staking. This change and down pressure it causes on price will be in favor of node providers, who will mint higher amount of ICP rewards.

This is incredibly important. A discussion should be had about rewards, but this proposal is very short sighted and potentially harmful to the whole ecosystem.

@infu

WTN 51%+, Synapse 51%+ and CodeGov 51%+ seem to be predominantly protecting the interests of these, which we named ‘The inverse group’ - mostly made out of people who don’t have significant amount of 8y ICP neurons, but get paid $ amounts of ICP monthly, node providers, reviewers, hubs, other services, possibly some employees etc. Which allows them to profit from such scheme, because they have almost no skin in the game.

And this…

The people supporting this proposal are people who will happily walk away and move on to the next thing when the tremendous potential the IC has is destroyed. Meanwhile, the people with the long term vision will be punished.

This is all backwards. At the very least this should be a No vote until after Caffeine is launched and the foundation has the bandwidth to properly assess potential changes to the staking and reward system.

@bjoernek

[jokerswild]

Adam, could you please provide the evidence you have collected that @dfisher is heavily invested in or has ties to Coinbase because I asked him recently straight up and he basically denied it from the verbatim conversation below (or I believe he did).

And how do you and Donna know he has plans to undermine the IC using WTN and Coinbase Liquid Staking as you state in your current motion? Couldn’t I also make the same argument against You and Donna based on your huge investments as well? How can anyone trust any large stakeholders motives? You have Dragginz so that’s skin in the game fine but having nodes is also skin right and you and Donna now plan to spin up a bunch of nodes as well. Couldn’t David now sling the same accusations against you two based on similar type of evidence? What has David done to harm the IC other than to make very large investments? I mean I’m not happy with his last minute investment in Waterneuron’s Papaya sale as it massively reduced my percentage stake but I mean you have a 90% stake in Trax which I’m invested in and I’m not slinging accusations at you or mad because you have complete control over Dragginz where every proposal is already decided before you propose it… Isn’t this a bit hypocritical?

April 27th, 2025
Me: Are you heavily invested in Coinbase’s “Base” chain? There is a conspiracy theory revolving around you David regarding you being one of the earliest investors in Coinbase’s “BASE” chain.

Is this true? Are you one of the earliest Coinbase “Base” investors?

David: No it’s a complete fabrication. It’s literally all lies.
Sorry the truth is more boring than some would hope.

FWIW I wish I was a seed investor in Coinbase!

[Agnostic]

@jokerswild

Adam, could you please provide the evidence you have collected that @dfisher is heavily invested in or has ties to Coinbase because I asked him recently straight up and he basically denied it from the verbatim conversation below (or I believe he did).

At this point we need more than just Borovan’s data. Just going off of what he shows and his own conclusions, esp. given his conspiracy theory tendencies, doesn’t cut it for me anymore. We need the other side to respond as well to have both perspectives @dfisher.

[1eo]

It’s simple Adam has no proof of anything because it’s all diffamation.

[infu]

So far 70% of Adam’s ‘conspiracy’ theories turned out to be true, the other 30% have a pending status.

[kyliux]

@borovan

Ok why don’t we do another motion proposal to ignore the first motion proposal.

Yes, it was a year ago. Since then we’ve found out that Leo and Enzo have done all sorts of shady stuff and are bad actors backed by David Fisher and Wenzel.

Alice - that’s Enzo and Leo
Boom DAO defence, stealing $100k, - that’s enzo and leo too

WHY ONLY DEFEND ??

We could also vote to take ownership to their wallet or neurons to PUNISH bad actors. Reverse any previous grant they recieved.

[LukeStylewalker]

Well, just off the fact that the proposal is incomplete and didn’t match the original motion proposal… Can someone please explain me, why CEXes offering ICP staking to retail should result in any kind of ICP price down pressure or value extraction from the ecosystem?

Crypto is a game of attention, and without attention there will be no mass adoption. Its pretty straight forward. We can have our 8y Neurons having a big slice of VP earn useless tokens or having a smaller slice earn Tokens worth a shitton.

Not defending anyone here but some claims made here are just plain stupid in my opinion. We should rather use our energy to make the icp more attractive to people outside the ecosystem than freighten them with this kind of protectionist BS.

[jokerswild]

I would agree. I’m not siding with either side here but I believe we need to be careful accusing people based upon mostly circumstantial evidence. What someone might do and what they will actually do are two different things. We can guess and guess wrong. This is not “Minority Report”. Would it make sense for David to be essentially be an “Angel” investor in the IC similar to Adam and heavily invest in SNS projects like WaterNeuron as well as in infrastructure like nodes just to jeopardize his investments in it? Unless there is some damning evidence that Brian Armstrong or some other sinister higher up at Coinbase is funding this crypto terrorism and they were also possibly linked to SBF’s price manipulation from Genesis and are now trying to finish the job, this is like trying to predict the future and whether Satoshi Nakamoto is going to rug all of Bitcoin in the future with his outstanding 1.1M Bitcoins and that was his true motive from day 1, not altruism for the world… Why go to such great lengths and with such large sums of money and spend so much time doing so? But I would like to hear the other side’s defense to all these allegations as well esp. if there is some “damning” evidence here to convict them all.

I asked @wpb directly and @dfisher directly about this and here is what they responded:

April 25th, 2025
Me: Wenzel, I’d like to hear your side of Adam’s accusations that you are working for Coinbase and specifically David Fisher in order to destroy the IC so that “Base” monopolizes web3.

I invested a large sum in WaterNeuron and also helped push it on social media so I am extremely shocked at these accusations by Adam who says he has proof tying you and the “base crew” that has infiltrated DFINITY in order to further Coinbase’s plans at the expense of the ICP project.

Is any of this true?

And if not, what is Adam planning to compete with Waterneuron and essentially dilute its value (and my investment in it?)??

Wenzel: No, I don’t work for Coinbase or David Fisher. No, I’m not trying to destroy ICP or web3. I doubt David is acting in any nefarious way either. I don’t know much about Base.

I haven’t read this post by Adam yet, but will dive in this evening when I get home from work.

Me: David, I wish you and Wenzel and anyone else that Adam is slinging accusations at would please set the record straight in some new thread on the forum because these mostly false conspiracy theories and name calling like “waterneuron scammers” etc. is not helping the community at large and is driving investors away from ICP at this pivotal moment in time.

David: There are certainly arguments in favor of what you’re suggesting.

The maddening part is that I’ve found the more I’ve engaged Adam, the more I’ve gotten on his radar, and the more he becomes obsessive and irrational. So my current thinking is the best path forward is to not engage him.

I hear you though. It is frustrating.

[kyliux]

What if we roll BACK to direct proportional voting power and reward ? **
** Making 8 years neuron GREAT AGAIN ?

Making 6 month dissolving reward and vote comparatively small again.

This would make almost impossible for waterneuron to take over the network and give back the natural reward and responsibility to the ones that deserve it the most.

it’s simple and efficient. No downside, only positive rollback.

Reducing comparatively 8 year neuron rewards and voting power was a part of this malicious place from the first day it was invented, i don’t even need to point fingers, we all know.
People that need to have liquid stacking can still go into waterneuron.

[tomimas1990]

wait, what? is this the banfield, who many times openly said he locked for 8 years, never wanted to touch his initial stake and only take out rewards? hmmmmmmm.

[wpb]

@krzysztofzelazko

Lowering the minimum dissolve delay doesn’t break the system. If anything, it gives new users a chance to stake directly, without locking up their ICP for half a year right from the start. That’s not a bad thing. In fact, it might help reduce centralization by making it easier for people to avoid custodial staking or liquid staking platforms altogether.

Be careful Krzysztof. You are at risk of making it onto @borovan’s hit list by applying logic and reason to refute his conspiracy theories with an intellectually honest opinion that differs from his own reality.

@borovan

His name came up a LOT when we were researching the bad node providers. Poland seems to be some hub of shell companies.

Oh crap @krzysztofzelazko, it’s too late. Looks like you are already on the hit list. Just be careful about taking D-Quorum and co.delta down with you. I doubt he realizes who controls those known neurons yet.

@krzysztofzelazko

That’s just lazy generalization.

Yep, you are definitely on the hit list now. Notice how the goon squad has been called. They smell fresh blood.

@Thyassa

The people supporting this proposal are people who will happily walk away and move on to the next thing when the tremendous potential the IC has is destroyed. Meanwhile, the people with the long term vision will be punished.

The truth is that everyone involved in WaterNeuron, CodeGov, Synapse, D-QUORUM and CO.DELTA has significant skin in the game and cares a great deal about the internet computer. We all strive to ensure the right people are making decisions that are in the long term best interest of the IC. None of these known neurons pencil whip our votes or abuse our voting power with conspiracy theories and rich man temper tantrums.

@jokerswild

Couldn’t I also make the same argument against You and Donna based on your huge investments as well? How can anyone trust any large stakeholders motives? You have Dragginz so that’s skin in the game fine but having nodes is also skin right and you and Donna now plan to spin up a bunch of nodes as well. Couldn’t David now sling the same accusations against you two based on similar type of evidence? What has David done to harm the IC other than to make very large investments? I mean I’m not happy with his last minute investment in Waterneuron’s Papaya sale as it massively reduced my percentage stake but I mean you have a 90% stake in Trax which I’m invested in and I’m not slinging accusations at you or mad because you have complete control over Dragginz where every proposal is already decided before you propose it… Isn’t this a bit hypocritical?

Oh snap! Are people actually starting to stand up to and ask questions about @borovan? That’s two in this thread alone. I’m sure you are now on the hit list @jokerswild, but don’t worry…you too will survive like those of us who have come before you.

@Agnostic

At this point we need more than just Borovan’s data. Just going off of what he shows and his own conclusions, esp. given his conspiracy theory tendencies, doesn’t cut it for me anymore.

Holy crap! That’s three! You’re done @borovan. It’s over.

---

In all seriousness, all Borovan did today is regurgitate the same worn out conspiracy theories that he has been promoting for a couple of months now. All accusations have been responded to with reasonable and credible explanations and it is never enough. It makes no difference what evidence is provided…his mind is made up and there is no changing it. He lacks any capacity for objective decision making that is based on evidence. Most of us are simply tired of trying to engage.

This discussion started today because of a proposal to reduced the min dissolve delay to vote from 6 months to 3 months. This is an idea that has been in discussion for years and did not just start in this forum thread. It is true that a motion proposal was made that passed by overwhelming majority many months ago and was even voted for by DFINITY. There have been recent code updates that make it logical to think that the change could be implemented. However, I’m not aware that the code is complete and ready for implementations. In fact, I would prefer that Dfinity submit the proposal that ultimately implements this change because at that point I would be confident that the code is ready. Since this proposal was not submitted by Dfinity, I have voted to reject proposal . It’s too big of a change to get it wrong.

I still applaud @krzysztofzelazko for pushing the boundaries on this proposal 136702 like he has done so many times before. This is clearly done in the true spirit of decentralization and with logic and reason.

Unfortunately, I can’t say the same goes for @borovan with his ridiculous proposal 136703. It’s just another example of how he is destroying the credibility of the IC in the eyes of the greater crypto community. The reduction in developer activity on the forum and the ICP token price performance are likely indicators of the @borovan effect we are experiencing. It’s a serious problem and more people need to be willing to talk about it publicly.