/biz/ - Business & Finance

Linkpool rugging was the last straw

>>52765875
Why do they need to stake link in this manner?
Why can't everyone just stake it?
And WHY is the token needed?

>>52765887
and why are you so stupid?

>>52765875
there's a reason they chose 7k as the max staking amount per account

>>52765900
he got you stinky lol

>>52765875
why lock up your stinkies for 2 years at >5% apy when you can sell now and buy back 10x in 6 months. Only a retard would fall for this scam.

>>52765887
there's 1 bn link
22.5M is for a single eth/usd price feed

>>52765906
huh?

>>52766141
some magic number crap that sergey and ari love doing. i don't remember specifics but the 7k wasn't an asspull amount.

>>52766353
Yea it’s call marketting, how do u market to shizo?

>>52765875
>nobody
>10 million staked

>>52766451
1 billion supply

>>52766466
only 51% of that in circulation and this is for a single data feed. 10M within 12 hours isn't bad

>>52766498
cope

>>52766498
Should be a lot faster, I know most ogs are still hanging from the side

>>52766502
>>52766512
what are you comparing it to? that you just thought it would fill instantly?

>>52765875
Yawn. Staking is retarded. And the gay airdrops are even more retarded.

>>52766353
They wanted to give as many people a chance to get in as possible. You fucking ingrates it is literally "early staking for community members".

>>52766614
no shit dude what i'm saying is that when you math 7k with some other number you get some well known "magic" number. there was a thread about it but I don't remember the specifics.

>>52766623
some other number related to link. eligible wallets, or circulating supply, or something along those lines. drawing a blank

this is actually a perfect outcome, strong interest but will open to general public too
what we want is for interest to spike in staking so people stack link before the next v0.1 expansion
much better than a no cap or higher cap situation

wen number go up sers

>>52766649
>this is actually a perfect outcome
>embarrassingly low demand that demonstrates nobody cares about chainlink

>>52766659
>demonstrates nobody cares about chainlink
yet here you are wasting your time reading and writing about it

>>52766659
the specific eligibility criteria might have something to do with the "embarrassingly low demand"

Thoughts on splitting off 7k into a second wallet to try for public access staking?
It seems like a lot of hassle and overhead to have multiple wallets on the one Ledger, but potentially being able to stake twice as much LINK might make it worthwhile.

>>52766757
worth a shot. if there's enough demand they may open additional price feed pools. i haven't read anything saying as much but i don't think it's a stretch to expect a btc/usd feed if things go well with this one.

>>52766623
I asked that question yesterday the guy said to divide 1b by 7k and it was 142,857
Just more schizo bullshit about ari and numerology again

>>52766808
ah that was it ty anon
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/142857

>>52766096
you only need 1 though

>>52766973
i worded it stupidly
22.5m is for a single price feed (eth/usd)

>>52765875
Sergey is a fat piece of shit, that's why. Who really wants to risk staking for an entire year for little to no return? Especially when it dropped more than 4.5% in the last 7 days. Fat man has been too greedy and people have had enough. Sergay betray

>>52767399
Dumping link wasn’t enough, literally destroyed lpl bagholders, by colluding with lpl

>>52767417
greedy fat cunt slurped up 7.7% of what we funded to start
be surprised if he isnt booed off stage next smartcon

>>52767528
be surprised if *Jonny isnt booed off stage next smartcon

>>52765875
So this is today's esl faggot logic
>SO UH NO ONE CARES BECAUSE IT WENT TO LIKE 40 PERCENT CAPACITY ON THE SAME DAY IT LAUNCHED WITH DEPOSIT LIMITS OF 7K
Amazing. Just amazing. Please do gif related to yourself for every post you make from now on.
I might sell 100k link and go long on this retards extra chromosomes instead.

>>52767634
he's right anon lol
seethe more retard lmao

>>52767640
>h-he's right if I just say he's right
>*w-we're* not seething y-you're seething that's why we angrily beg for you to sell your linkies every day
I have 21k staked across 3 wallets (and that's less than half of what I own, which i wont sell anyway.) How does this make you feel? Go on, seethe at me some more, cuck.

>>52767707
didn't read
not buying
faggot lmfao

>>52765875
>cant even get 22.5m link staked
it's actually over

im shy

guys c'mon it's really humiliating to be less than half staked after all this hype... c'mon guys if just 2000 more of us stake the full amount we'll get it

>>52765875
Fudders growing weary

>>52766649
Fr fr

>>52767741
>can't buy*
>spams biz with fud for something he doesn't own
Thanks for proving my point, cuck

>>52765875
Early steak is for OGs only with massive stacks, meaning the ones who didn't stake are either dead or so afraid of losing their link that they won't even stake. This is unironically bullish and I fucking hate link

>>52767855
I shorted chainshit and made more in 1 hour than you will in the next two years LMAO
how does that make your little cock in the chastity cage feel lol

>>52766659
Why do you care tho?

>>52765875
And link already crashed by 10% not even 24H after staking started. As we warned it would.
This was the final Betrayal.

>>52766988
It's an important price feed.
I think we are underestimating the relevance of having a fixed supply. Drying liquidity and having people buying link to stake will shoot the price once normalfags notice.

>>52766498
>it's not bad
Get sergey cock out of your mouth, it's utter dogshit. The risk ratio is beyond awful.
If you want me to lock up my momey for 2 years (maybe more) you better come with a mid double digit APY lol.

>>52766649
Stfu paid shill

>it's dumping
classic link

>>52766512
>Should be a lot faster
You don't know how the wallet allocations work.
This system was specifically designed to fill up in a way to allow as many as possible to contribute.
Hence the wallet identification, hence the 7k per eligible wallet, hence the "early/general" division, etc.

>>52768152
hence why people took days off their job to catch early access cause "the pool would get filled in mere minitues guise I'm so nervous!"
nice cope bro, see ya tommorow, when general access flops just like early access

>>52768165
>"the pool would get filled in mere minitues guise I'm so nervous!"
whoa, anonymous posters on 4channel said THAT????
Well obviously that completely negates whatever Chainlink planned!

>>52767417
colluding how? Exactly what did chainlink do in the LPL case? I have observed LPL from the sidelines for years as i didnt see the point, so im a little out of the loop on this one

>>52768175
rich coming from you
>You don't know how the wallet allocations work
>but I do!
keep coping

>>52768207
Everything I'm talking about is literally spelled out by Chainlink themselves lol.
Wallet identification, hence the 7k per eligible wallet, hence the "early/general" division, etc.

Linkies knew where they stood
Their leader bearded plump
With long arrears to make good
When Sergey began to dump

They were not easily moved
Awaiting a foretold pump
Til every count be proved
Yet Sergey continued to dump

Their voices were timid and high
In every throat, a lump
Yet all they could do was cry
As Sergey continued to dump

Their sweaty hands were shaking
Praying "it's only a slump,
Just wait until we're staking"
Still Sergey continued to dump

Delusions were not quickly bred
Not every holder was a chump
But through the dismal years ahead
And every thread that gets a bump
Sergey will continue to dump

>>52768259
sure bro, and I'm absolutely positive you'll come up with more excuses tomorrow

>>52768271
>sure bro
Are you retarded, it's all literally spelled out: https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-staking-launch-details/

I have 11k LINK bought at ICO and I'm not staking because they are also locking the rewards.

This is not the staking I was promised

>>52768303
Well then don't stake, you get to make your own decisions
No-one really cares whether anyone stakes or doesn't stake, since the ones who were going to do it will do it regardless

>>52767997
I'll give you a middle finger apy, fool !

>>52768345
people who don't have early access care. I am willing to sell my early access spot for 200 LINK

>>52768367
lmao who cares - if you want to make it into general access just be ready when it's out
Also why would anyone buy a spot in early access for 2/3 of the gains they would get for the year while staking
You're a little jew

>>52768345
>No-one really cares whether anyone stakes or doesn't stake
Man have I got a thread for you: >>52755151

Spoiler: 75 pbtid

of course sergey choked on a big mac mid verse

>>52768395
I read that dribble and I wouldn't be surprised if it's Michael or another one of those degenerates just seething endlessly

>>52768345
me:

you:
>Well then don't stake, you get to make your own decisions
No-one really cares whether anyone stakes or doesn't stake, since the ones who were going to do it will do it regardless

AI says y'all no-stakers are fags

>>52768416
Staking ChainLink is risky, a gamble indeed
For the returns may not necessarily meet your needs.
To make the bet, you’d have to put your stake in
Though the rewards might not justify the risk of it.

Digital assets can be unstable and hard to predict
At any moment things can take an unexpected turn.
Therefore, staking in ChainLink should be done with caution
For you might end with an unexpected lot of red in the equation.

Even though there are potential profits to be gained
Your funds could just as easily be drained.
And if the network should suffer some sort of hack
Your LINKs could vanish and you’ll be left feeling slack.

The blockchain industry is quite young and still ever-changing
You might end up with huge losses and lots of complaining.
So it’s important to be mindful when it comes to staking
Your funds are important and you should be very careful of what you’re taking.

Write a screenplay of a Chainlink investor losing hope in the Chainlink project after Linkpool decided to rape their investors personally

FADE IN:

EXT. PARK - DAY

A young, attractive investor is walking through the park, her expression a mix of anger and despair. She looks defeated as she gazes out into the distance.

Suddenly, her phone starts buzzing. She pulls it out and reads the message on the screen.

MESSAGE:

Linkpool has decided to rape their investors personally.

The investor stops in her tracks, her face turning pale. She stares off into the distance, her mind racing with thoughts of anger and betrayal. She takes a deep breath, trying to steady herself, but the emotions overwhelm her.

She drops to her knees, tears streaming down her face. She begins to sob uncontrollably, her body shaking with each breath.

FADE OUT.

best one yet:


FADE IN

EXT. STREET - DAY

The sun is setting on a busy street. The sky is lit up with orange and red hues.

We follow a MAN in his early thirties. He's walking with a purpose.

He wears a Chainlink t-shirt and is carrying a laptop bag. He looks a little disheveled and his eyes are red from lack of sleep.

He stops at a cafe and pulls out his laptop. He looks up at the sky and takes a deep breath.

CUT TO

INT. CAFE - DAY

The man is seated in front of his laptop. He opens it up and begins to search for news about Chainlink.

He scrolls through headlines and articles, getting more and more frustrated as he reads.

He comes across an article about Linkpool, a company that promised to help investors make money with Chainlink but ended up taking their money and running.

He slams his laptop shut and takes a deep breath. He looks out of the window and the sky is now dark.

He takes a sip of his coffee and starts to cry.

CUT TO

EXT. STREET - NIGHT

The man is walking down the street, still carrying his laptop bag. He looks up at the dark sky and takes a deep breath.

He looks a little more composed now, but his eyes still show the pain he is feeling.

He walks past a newsstand and stops to read the headlines. He sees a headline about Linkpool and shakes his head in disgust.

He continues walking, his steps getting slower as he comes to terms with the fact that he has lost all his money in the Chainlink project.

He stops and looks up at the sky, tears streaming down his face.

FADE OUT

>>52765875
Just goes to show how many holders qualified for early access and actually held their LINK in a wallet instead of an exchange

>>52768532
>Linkpool has decided to rape their investors personally.
kek

>>52765875
I predict early next year people who staked will start panicking about their stake amount and pay out reducing.
>Is it a bug?
>Is it a hack?
>Is it penalties being incurred due to poor programming?

If it was open the pool would be filled after 10 blocks I'm sure, i think the general demand is huge it's just very limited to very select addresses now. Many holders have multiples of 7k but aren't able to stake more, other anons with huge bags and will to stake have disqualified themselves by renewing their addresses too much or changing custody, remember how many anons had their link on Celsius, blockfi, FTX, bancor and so on?

>>52766512
I know i barely used my allocation. Honestly 5% isn't that appealing. I just put a token amount in.

>>52766498
HAHAHAHA FUCKING COPING STAKER

>>52768856
> I just put a token amount in.

>>52765906
because it limits the total loss when unstaking never comes, right? they don't want the "i lost my life savings you assholes" posts on twitter

Brainlet and 1k Linklet here who has been away for 2 years.
What is staking and why would I stake my 1000 link?

>>52769766
>why would I stake
Because you get more Link for free

>>52769788
How much? Is it set gains or volatile?

>>52765875
Why would you want to stake for such low apy% and if...just IF price actually goes up for once, guess what?
YOU CANT SELL AND TAKE PROFITS!!
HAHAHAHHA STINKY LINKIES YOU'RE SO DAMN BRAINWASHED AAHAAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

>>52766451
>1% staked
>2% of market supply
>WOW
you'll snap out of it one day.

>>52769856
Not bad for a single feed lol

>>52767909
So the price will never shoot up then. This is not dog coins or monkey jpgs.

>>52768196
the 100 million LPL got halved into 50 million SDL. Then the supply got inflated to 260 million and the other nodes of SDL got 10 million each, CLL got 20 million SDL and it basically got downgraded to a DAO token. Johnny also works at CLL sinde 2018

> "good luck getting in after early access!"
> *sits under half filled*
lol, lmao even.

Also the lack of auto-compounding is highly suggestive of there being no real staking or reward mechanism at work. Simply a wallet and a centralized reward tally that will be enacted at some point in the next year. Not a given, but very suggestive.

>>52766141
Anon, some of us have 50K Link in our wallets. The amount staked would have filled up to the top in the first hour had it not have a cap per wallet. Whales now have to wait till tomorrow to get the rest of their stuff in.

>>52768165
We're at 10 million filled at the moment. The rest, 12 million Link, will be filled tomorrow.

But yes, I thought the pool would be filled in an hour. I'm happy to wrong, I wasn't taking any chances after waiting for staking to come out for so long.

>>52769992
>I thought the pool would be filled in an hour
How? It's capped at 7k per long-term holder wallet.

>>52769873
>one feed available
>WOAH 1% ON THIS FEED ALONE, INCREDIBLE!
cope

>>52770014
It barely took anything to qualify for the early access. I move wallets relatively often and qualified with a wallet that has had maybe a dozen link or so in it for a year.

>>52769963
>Simply a wallet and a centralized reward tally that will be enacted at some point in the next year.
that would be a real kicker
>muh smartcontracts
>muh trustless
>muh automation

>>52770041
It's my suspicion as to why rewards are locked, but the lack of compounding further suggests that.

As said it's not a given there would be compounding even if it was all done but certainly if it's an inoperant state there definitely wouldn't be.

Can somebody explain to me how Link is different from HEX?

>>52770068
they are completely the same bro, Richard Heart = Sergey Nazarov

>>52770057
Yeah and the fact that there is no guaranteed unstaking date. Why use a smartcontract if it's still 100% decided by a human. The point of a smartcontract is that it'll still work without human intervention.

The roasties he employs are probably just there to manually set up the payout contracts after the pool's closed which they estimated would take 9-12 months.

>>52770029
There were 2 criteria. Either you held 7 LINK or more for 90% in recent history (some random announcement dates) or for 50% of the time since Mainnet i think.

>>52770141
My personal belief is that they were insanely behind schedule but wanted to preserve the reputation of the project so have basically said "put your tokens in this box and behind the curtain it's staking" and they hope in the next year to finish the actual mechanism then make good with rewards.

I guess that could be ascertained by token movements. If at any point there's just a huge shift in tokens from a team wallet to the staking wallet that would likely confirm it.

>>52770141
>>52770057
>>52770041
This makes no sense, they could fake a compounding effect the same way on the front end site if they didn't have any smart contracts. They had their smart contracts audited privately ages ago according to Sergey's speeches and publicly in November 3 weeks ago.

>>52770217
the difference between you and me is that by now I simply have 0 trust in Sergey and CLL. He says truth over trust. He does the opposite. That mean he lied. That means I simply do not trust another word this man says. I only trust what he does. And what he does is lie and scam.

>>52770217
Well they wouldn't know if they would eventually implement a compounding feature, so the default would 100% be not to have one faked whilst they work out the details.

>>52770141
7-9 months and this staking is in beta. Cope

>>52770269
oh now it's only 7-9 months ? first it was 12 maybe 24 months, then 9-12 months after some backlash and now that it looks like shit's really hitting the fan you come along and push it even lower.
get fucked CLL employee.

>>52770249
Truth over trust does not apply to development schedules. It's like asking him what the weather and temperature will be in a month in New York, it has nothing to do with truth or trust. You can't predict the future, you can give informed predictions but you can't give definitive truth about the future.

>>52765875
>7000 LINK limit
You cared enough to FUD ironically.
A minimum of 1357 wallets are controlled by people who care about staking. A maximum of 9499400 wallets are controlled by people who care about staking.

>>52770373
and my prediction based on past performance is that there will be no product release (muh staking 0.2, you can unstake now INCREDIBLE WOOOOOW*) and only more and more empty promises while feedinh hope and cope to less and less baggies.


*4% unstaking fee

>>52770355
did you put all your hopes and dreams into link and then sell the bottom or what? the amount of seethe steaming off your posts is sad

>>52770401
This, don't feed the trollfags

>>52770401
>sell the bottom
what bottom ?
>>52770423
>nooo don't criticise my baggies or you're a troll
come on man.

>>52770457
looks like we have our answer. better luck next time friend. this round of staking is only to secure a single price feed. i'm sure you'll have time to dca in and get more before the next pool opens. don't give up

>>52765875
Nobody wants their link.
nobody cares

I imagine that tomorrow will be a much better indicator of whether the notion that "nobody wants to stake" is accurate or not.
I have some LINK that I just plan to hodl on coinbase in case the moon shot ever occurs, but I'm not really interested in trying to do the .1 staking.

>>52770477
keep coping and projecting your fantasies onto anonymous posters. I'm sure it alleviates the pain of being an idiot.

>>52770515
keep lashing out at strangers on the internet, i hope it brings you some peace

>>52765875
kek nostakers
once that 22500000 is filled were going to dunk on you because you'll be forced to use linkpool KEK

>>52770029
>held for a year
>barely took anything
lol

>>52770024
It's 2.5% of total supply, 5% of circulating.

>>52770531
>keep lashing out
where did I lash out ? I'm simply pointing out indiscrepancies and having me some fun over this clusterfuck. The cope of baggies is unreal. The only ones that IMO can still cope is those who bought unter $1. If you can't take me making fun of this shit then reddit might be the place for you.
>>52770534
>linkpoo
the entirety of linkpoo combined with stink.link can only stake 750k or so linkies over 260 million stink.link tokens

How did the price feeds work for the last five years? Is this staking thing even needed?

>>52770575
>currently staked: 10.2 million LINK
>total supply 1 billion
>circulating supply around 500 million
ok, it's 1.02% now
even if the pool is completely filled it's 2.25% (4.5%), don't start inflating the numbers.

>>52770192
what if you held since 2019 but everything on coinbase? i fucked up lads. i've had metamask since then but didn't send my linkies over. tried sending a few now but the early access thing is greyed out on the staking site; i also setup a coinbase wallet too but same problem. what sucks is ive actually held for quite a while, though on cb like a total brainlet
>t.NGMI

>>52770620
Staking is needed to increase security, making anonymous nodes viable.

>>52770628
>even if the pool is completely filled it's 2.25%
The pool is 25 million. 2.5 million is specifically for nodes who stake.

>>52770660
>2.5 million is specifically for nodes who stake.
I stand corrected.

>>52770563
Having $100 of some token for half a year really isn't much.

>>52766466
>>52769856
>it's only 2% of the total supply!!1!11
>not even 24 hours into staking

>>52765875
just following sergeys advice

>>52769899
oof shit that is a bitch ass move

>>52771006
why do you lie by inflating the numbers
it's 1.02%, that's only 200k more since your last post over 10 hours ago >>52766451

>>52770534
Dumb nigger it's not even going to reach the limit. Only thing that will get filled is your asshole with sergey cum as he creampied you yet again

>>52769899
Pretty massive red flag about CCL in general

>>52771097
i mean, they are no stranger to diluting peoples shares amirite ;_:

>>52771159
At least they upfront about it

>>52768614
This is what I was thinking, even a lot of "og"s probably didn't qualify because they moved to a new wallet or something. My gf has been holding link since 2020 and she didn't qualify.

>>52771345
This. I wasn't eligible but I've held since 2019. Will be staking tomorrow if the pool doesn't do a biden and fill up in 4 seconds flat.

>>52771345
No way she didn't. I qualified with barely any link in a wallet that was maximally a year old.

>>52771458
She had hers on coinbase and only bought a ledger amd moved it there like november 2021 or something. Can't remember exactly but she missed the cutoff by a few months. It's not like anyone knew there even was a date lile that until like 2 months ago. Especially considering everyone thought link could pump really hard with the bull market last year I bet there was a ton of og link in exchange wallets. The niggers who just went to ethplorer and counted all the wallets with 7k didn't take many variables into account, I'm sure there are some massive wallets that didn't qualify.

>not your keys not your crypto
>oh well this different this is an official chainlink smart contract you should send your funds there it can't go tits up
Hypocrites

>>52771732
Buddy here never heard of staking before.

>>52771044
Someone needs to update this and include staking v0.1 on the left and relentlessly spam it on all Chainlink social media channels.

>>52771849
Nice id

>>52771657
Had the same problem but was getting rewards in Blockfi. Doesn't look like we'll lose out though the pool is still open...
>>52771849
TNN id...its really over isnt it?

>>52770373
>You can't give definitive truth about when a smart contract will let you unstake
Do you really believe this? What is the point of Keepers/Automation if they can't program a contract to let you withdraw after X amount of time?

>>52772269
Because X amount of time depends on when they finish the next iteration. It's not a fixed point in time.

>>52773046
They don't have to finish the next iteration to let us unstake. I have yet to see a reason why an indefinite lockup is necessary.

>>52773065
>They don't have to finish the next iteration to let us unstake.
They're literally telling us that's the case.

>>52773150
I'm saying that there is no reason they were forced to do it this way. v0.2's unstake button could have been implemented in 5 minutes into v0.1, they purposefully left it out.

>>52773163
The whole point of this staking period is to test things out over a longer term.

>>52773182
Testing staking out over a longer term is not mutually exclusive with having an unstake button.

>>52773193
it is when shit needs to get done before unstaking.

>>52771754
>no you don't understand -- this is special chainlink staking and it is actually different

>>52773303
My point is that chainlink staking is NOT different when it comes to the simple fact that tokens are locked up in a wallet whose keys you don't have.

>>52766808
142857 is cyclic when multiplied by 1-7. The digits move through a cyclic permutation. Maybe this has significance in terms of "things staying the same but looking different" as the project has moved through years 1-6 but are set to break the pattern going into year 7 (2023)
>inb4 meds

>>52773812

so after 15 hours less than 1 million link have been staked
dare I say it's ogre?

Can you help me understand?
So let's assume the cryptoscam works, link successfully attracted like 10000 more people that bought some crypto bullshit, driving the price up say to $100. Then the 2 year limit for all bagholding stakers expires and considering the sentiment that I see on /biz/, the first thing they're going to do is try to sell their entire bags to "get rich". Wouldn't that immediately drive the price all the way down below 0.005?
What's the idea exactly?

>>52772183
Right, I told her to just sit there 5 minutes before the countdown ends tomorrow with everything set up and ready to go and just click the button asap

>>52774076
the idea is that your mother licks poop out of my bunghole

>>52773208
are you saying the devs are so incompetent that "unstaking" takes more than a couple days dev time?

>>52774179
"Until shit gets done" is quite ambiguous I agree, but no it doesn't mean the developing of the literal button, anon.

>>52774179
The point of staking is to test certain things out over the longer term.
Apparently a bunch of things (including things that are still in development) need to happen first.

>>52774193
are you saying the architects are so incompetent that "unstaking" is so deeply coupled to "other shit" that it can't be delivered upfront?

Yeah I'm really going to stake something that has had a yearly return of -90% and already dumped like 7% in the last week and is STILL dumping as I type this post. No thanks.

>>52774236
>why would you test something if you can just deliver it upfront??

>>52769972
>some of us have 50K Link in our wallets.
Too bad you cant just make more wallets. Linkies are so fucking retarded.

>>52774218
Yea, test out how willing linkers are to sending their tokens to sergey to dump.

>>52774252
>testing of trivial functionality has to happen in production

>>52774285
>Chainlink staking
>"trivial functionality"

>>52774301
>unstaking
>"complex functionality"

>>52774337
Protip: it's not unstaking that has to be tested.

>>52773812
6969 would of been a much more magical number the team fucked up with this cringe nerd shit

>>52774351
then why is there no unstaking button if it doesn't require testing?

>>52774377
Because everything else has to be tested.

>>52774076
>considering the sentiment that I see on /biz/

>>52774251
Reread what anon is saying, many have done that in preparation for general access

>>52769972
I highly doubt most of you will stake your entire 50k stack for v0.1.. its too risky.

>>52765875
you can get better yield with fucking BONDS or high yield savings account lmao

>>52774386
by that logic, the countdown widget requires testing, because it's included. must be pretty terrible devs if they have to test that

>>52774609
You seriously can't think of a situation where unstaking randomly during testing of new functionality could fuck it up? The pool will be filled to 25m and not a single LINK will leave. Would you agree this makes for a more controlled environment compared to a pool that fluctuates?

>>52774723
can you?
>a situation where unstaking randomly during testing of new functionality could fuck it up

>>52774723
so how will it be actually "tested" then if the conditions you are simulating are not real life conditions? How will they know if the system holds up when regulation FUD comes out and 30% of their users rush for the exits?

>>52774600
Bonds are a longer lock in and aren't denominated in LINK.

>>52774830
This. The tests should mimic the envisioned final product. Having a fixed lockup window is one thing, but an indefinite lockup is not how Chainlink will operate in the future and it doesn't make sense to have these artificial conditions for testing purposes.

>>52774723
>You seriously can't think of a situation where unstaking randomly during testing of new functionality could fuck it up?
I absolutely can, unstaking must be tested together with every other feature, that's why it should be there from the start. It was >>52774351 that claimed it doesn't need to be tested. Pretty ridiculous, we agree.

>>52773347
but we have the keys to a wallet that has a binding smart contract with the other wallet
idiot

>>52774352
>dude sex heh

>>52770212
>I guess that could be ascertained by token movements. If at any point there's just a huge shift in tokens from a team wallet to the staking wallet that would likely confirm it.

Chainlink already said they'll pay out staking rewards themselves for v0.1. 5% of 75M is 3.75M. If they're still paying for the rewards and not have staking rewards come from the protocol fees with v1.0, then we'd have a problem.

>>52770508
bro nobody is staking this shit, 20 hours left and it's not even 45% full...

>>52774886
you can sell bonds you shitbrained retard, you don't have to keep it for the duration.
>my yield is denominated in a shitcoin
which makes your pitiful yields that much worse lmao

>>52775174
Time will tell, I suppose. We'll see if anyone else jumps in the pool tomorrow.

>>52775239
like this ?

>>52771849
sorry, that post was mean't for you >>52775338

>>52768303
You will regret not staking mark my words

>>52771849
>>52775338
or like this ?

>>52775399
checked. threatening people will not help you shill.

>>52775506
Shitty edits of Sergey's Slides won't help you either fuddy.

>>52774790
I don't have to imagine.
>>52774830
>if the conditions you are simulating are not real life conditions?
How do you know nodes won't have lock up periods?

>>52775674
>we need to audit unstaking for 12 months
that's the only takeaway from your attached picture.
so let me reiterate my question to you:
>Can you imagine a situation where unstaking randomly during testing of new functionality could fuck it up?
and enlighten me please.

>>52775595
malding

This is a stake demon.

Dysgenic freaks who succumb to staking and token-lock addictions become demons.
They always think they are winning no matter what happens.
As long as they're being stimulated according to the pattern that allows them to receive their bi-yearly circle jerk rewards nothing else matters to them.
There is no incentive for them to logically analyze anything, least of all themselves.
They can always just retreat back into their autism and receive the greatest false hopium they know and all else can be forgotten.
Staking on demand accompanied by rewards hopium, the most common forms of hyperstimulus, have deleted the souls of the majority of the link bagholders.
Staking is the jew's greatest weapon and its casualties are piling up and choking out real humanity.

We have to de-stake them all.

Where's me fuckin NFT Jonneh????

>>52766080
I don't know why anyone would agree to staking a volatile coin in the first place when they can stake stablecoins on SpoolFi for more than 8% APY.

>>52774983
This would have been a good topic if that would be allowed before the completion of the 2yr lock up, but no it won't

>>52777167
Stablecoin staking is the new haven, especially when its done on a DeFi platform with good risk model, capital is secured while earning yield

>>52766353
See >>7777777 you gullible uneducated fuck