Last week the maturity modulation was released. As a consequence, the UX is updated today to more clearly represent maturity. Here’s an outline of the UX changes.
NNS front-end app
Maturity is now shown in absolute values instead of % of staked ICP, as the conversion of maturity to ICP is uncertain.
I was going to post the same suggestion, but then I realized that leaving off the units was probably intentional. Maturity has not been minted, so technically it’s not ICP. It’s more like an IOU.
I’ve been staking since last year, but this update doesn’t look good. It is difficult to see the daily rate of return if the existing percentage mark is removed and displayed only in quantity.
I think the percentage mark looks the same as before, and when the user clicks on the MERGE or SPAWN and moves the slider, It is better to show the number of ICP coins that can be obtained according to the slider adjustment ratio in real time.
Hi @thirdparty, at the moment when you spawn the amount of ICP is still uncertain due to the maturity modulation function. Hence we could only display a range of resulting ICP.
Bjoernek, that not true, fooling people with this new updates doesn’t make any sense, is just a distraction from something else bad you’re fellas doing as the ‘decentralized’ governance finally started to pickup now, when people starting to understand how it works. And apparently you, the top governing neurons by size, owned by the founders don’t like that ‘wake up call’ and now starting to come with tricky changes proposals that would retain that power over governance in your hands.
Why fooling? you’re going to ask… because the staking rewards dropped almost 50% in 2weeks since you’ve made that stupid, aka updated, changes and whatever they’re meant to do, if they cut the rewards in half or more over time, WE DON’T NEED THEM!
When trumping from the tribune about all these amazing acomplishments, don’t forget that ICP fell 99% from the ATH’s and by any economic definitions, that’s a failed business, bankrupt scam, call it what you want, and now those stuck with their ICP locked for 4-8years, and are 75-90% underwater with their initial investment, and can only HOPE that this POS is gonna turn around. To keep people motivated, you should REWARD the ICP holders with as much % as possible, and move all ICP’s [out of TOTAL SUPPLY] in circulation, having such a big unrelesed nr of ICP’s (an amount, that, to my unpleasant surprize, is still growing… don’t know why and how) is making me suspecting that majority of it will go to the top holders, which is not us, the ‘little guy’. It’ll be divded between the founders, the seed investors and those big whales neurons holders - just like FED did with +$9Trln of new money printed, that very little got to people, and most of it been stolen by the government, while everyone now is paying double on everything, compared to 2years ago because of inflation. The TOTAL ICP SUPPLY has to get released, so people know that’s it - we have a finite supply now, and you also should increase the burn speed of ICP, that will bring a deflationary effect on the price so we can recover from our losses. Most need at least the price of ICP to get to the $100-200 price range over the next 3-4years, in order to recover their losses. I’m sure most retail stakeholders would agree with me, but for now, please bring the rewards back and don’t invent all sort of schemes to screw up the ‘little guy’, if it’s not broken - don’t try to fix it!
I was under the impression staked maturity would be displayed as a separate value, so a neuron would have ICP stake and staked maturity contributing to its VP, but now it seems staked maturity is merged with the ICP stake. Does that mean if I were to stake 100 ICP for 6 months and shortly after dissolve the neuron due to unforeseen circumstance the original, 100 ICP would go through price modulation too? Or do only tokens originated from maturity go through modulation?
Are there any plans to allow moving non staked maturity between neurons? Some of us have many neurons with different dissolve delays and weekly/monthly merge maturity from low timeframe neurons to ones with long delays, this isn’t possible anymore without being affected by modulation, which makes the merge less effective during market downturns. The only workaround I can think of involves spawning a neuron and merging it, but this action isn’t available to ledger users and based on past experience probably won’t be possible for months.
I have ~1,182ICP staked, my neuron ID is 17121611114046667910.
I received zero maturity yesterday and the day before yesterday (even though I voted on quite a few proposals) and received 0.0056ICP as a maturity today. I have not changed my dissolve delay or topped up my neuron recently, so don’t believe this to be causing the issue.
My friend who has around 700 ICP staked for the same amount of time (>1year, non-dissolving) received his usual ~0.4ICP.
Could anyone provide any insight as to why my rewards are 100x less than usual? I understand that reward payouts have recently changed, but I don’t believe that warrants this huge drop in rewards.
@Jamietier, according to your neuron voting history, there are dozens of recent proposals that your neuron has not voted on. Looking at about the past week, your neuron didn’t vote on any of the proposals listed below, which could explain why your rewards are low. How do you have your neuron following set up?
73722 Update subnet 2fq7c to replica version b37a94be
73572 Replace nodes in subnet 5kdm2
73570 Replace nodes in subnet k44fs
73568 Replace a node in subnet cv73p
73566 Replace a node in subnet io67a
73565 Replace a node in subnet opn46
73564 Replace a node in subnet 6pbhf
73563 Replace nodes in subnet tdb26
73561 Replace a node in subnet pae4o
73560 Replace a node in subnet io67a
73559 Replace nodes in subnet tdb26
73558 Replace nodes in subnet e66qm
73555 Remove nodes: [r62hc]
73552 Update subnet eq6en to replica version fd53b006
73551 Update subnet w4asl to replica version fd53b006
73549 Replace a node in subnet pae4o
73541 Replace nodes in subnet e66qm
73535 Replace a node in subnet opn46
73534 Replace a node in subnet 6pbhf
73532 Update subnet 2fq7c to replica version fd53b006
73531 Update subnet shefu to replica version fd53b006
73527 Replace a node in subnet tdb26
73525 Replace a node in subnet qxesv
73524 Replace a node in subnet w4rem
73523 Replace a node in subnet qdvhd
73511 Replace a node in subnet w4rem
73510 Replace a node in subnet qdvhd
73507 Update subnet io67a to replica version fd53b006
73499 Replace a node in subnet qxesv
73497 Replace a node in subnet tdb26
73327 Update all unassigned nodes
73326 Update subnet tdb26 to replica version 4e51609f
72790 Replace a node in subnet uzr34
72783 Replace a node in subnet uzr34
72773 Replace a node in subnet w4asl
72733 Upgrade Nns Canister: qoctq-giaaa-aaaaa-aaaea-cai to wasm with hash: 630f5e8b2c4ea28e42d6bc8c741d093839df58c5a180475a2fb4529fd6c4a598
72730 Update subnet nl6hn to replica version 4e51609f
72729 Update subnet jtdsg to replica version 4e51609f
72728 Update subnet w4rem to replica version 4e51609f
72635 Add firewall rules
72619 Replace nodes in subnet lspz2
72616 Remove nodes: [s6tl5, 2riiy, qidmy, usf33, i5dly, 7muek, 5o4ne, 3fykl, x6e7h, gel7w, di47p]
72615 Update subnet fuqsr to replica version 4e51609f
72614 Update subnet e66qm to replica version 4e51609f
72613 Update subnet 6pbhf to replica version 4e51609f
72571 Replace nodes in subnet lspz2
72567 Update subnet 4ecnw to replica version 4e51609f
72566 Update subnet cv73p to replica version 4e51609f
72565 Update subnet brlsh to replica version 4e51609f
72562 Replace nodes in subnet lspz2
Thanks for the quick response. That’s really weird; I don’t have any followees and so therefore do solely manual voting, but I check the NNS every hour(ish) and vote on anything new - not sure how these haven’t been voted on…
Excluding that, I know that I voted on at least 8 proposals in the last two days, which should have produced more than 0.0056ICP as a maturity with a stake of over 1000 (if historical reward payouts are a good comparison, in light of the recent payout changes).
Do you have any recommendations on followees to maximise my voting rewards? I essentially have unlimited time to vote on proposals, so manual voting is no issue for me (if this is the answer to maximising votes).
Again, I am slightly confused as to how these proposals were either: missed by me and not voted on, or my votes were not actually registered (most likely to be an issue with my terrible internet, admittedly)
If you give it 4 days you will get your full voting rewards as long as you have Followee(s) configured for All Topics Except Governance as well as Governance. Ballots and eligible voting power for each neuron is established the moment a proposal is submitted, so your neuron is not eligible to vote on proposals that were submitted before being staked. If you have a neuron older than 4 days and then add a high amount of ICP stake, you still won’t get as much reward as you think you should get until the 4 days have passed because your new voting power hasn’t been applied to the existing open ballots.
You don’t earn more voting rewards by voting manually, so that’s not a requirement to maximize voting rewards.
Exchange Rate proposals are submitted automatically and voted automatically every 10 minutes. It’s probably not practical to vote on everything manually.
I’m aware of the effect that topping up a neuron has, but recently have only added 30ICP to my stake (on the 31st July).
Who would you suggest to follow for both topics; does it actually matter or is it just a case of following anyone? Apologies for the host of questions, I’ve only been staking on the NNS for just over a month, and so am still learning.
The public neurons in the NNS dApp that are known to actively vote independently on Governance proposals include DFINITY, ICDevs, and ICP Maximalist Network. Almost everyone, including public neurons, follow DFINITY for All Topics Except Governance.
