Estimated Link staking dates

[Anonymous No.51326166]

Testnet version 0.001 - 12/31/22 at 11:59pm

Testnet version 0.1 - 12/31/23 at 11:59pm

>both of the above are not available for retail, however please continue donating to the CL team to fund operations

Staking 1.0 - 12/31/25 at 11:59Pm…

>on the 1.0 release, the team is aiming to perfectly align the release with the end of the bull market, therefore inflicting max pain upon investors, which is the project’s main focus

[Anonymous No.51326191]

Fuck jannies stop deleting my threads
Pic related

[Anonymous No.51326702]

>>51326166
is this a chainlink fud thread?

usually they are more popular

[Anonymous No.51328543]

>>51326166
when neet nodes?

[Anonymous No.51329397]

>>51328543
Those dont exist. Go back in cagie

[Anonymous No.51329474]

>>51326166
>max pain upon investors, which is the project’s main focus
at least they achieved max success in their chosen path

>>51329397
biz collectively owns enough stinkies to setup its own node, if this were 2018 biz it could be done
however nubiz is beyond hope at the moment, maybe we setup a discord in the future with proof of link stack and can get things rolling

[Anonymous No.51331559]

>>51329474
Old idea. Many of us OGs already did that by funding a staking pool which by being earliest would have the most OG LINK lined up to stake in it.
That would be Linkpool.

[Anonymous No.51331659]

>>51331559
Which is to say some schmoes could set up a similar scheme to Linkpool in 2022, but they would still need to network in with Chainlink Labs and have some kind of ownership and smart contracts to handle payouts in a way that incentivizes LINK stacks to want to use it. Discord schmoes just going with trusting each other to handle it correctly is a very bad idea.

[Anonymous No.51331883]

>>51331659
i see the argument you are trying to make and yes trust is a big issue
but linkpool is nowhere near a neetnode its institutional by definition and not much different from anons soon to sign up for coinbase steaking (tm)
the poster asked for neet nodes specifically and i do remember some eth chad saying he bought 1 mil stinkies during the eoy 18 lows to run his own node

[Anonymous No.51332039]

>>51326702
Yes you may add this to the fud.threadList array.

[Anonymous No.51332119]

>>51331883
you're speculating CB will offer staking

[Anonymous No.51332163]

>>51331559
Why was there no mention of Linkpool in the staking roadmap? I would have thought if Linkpool was needed, they might have at least mentioned it?

[Anonymous No.51332321]

I thought this was a real thread. Then I read the first sentence and stopped.

[Anonymous No.51332647]

>>51332119
110% they will
for a fee of course
you really think if cb phones up sergay, the fat man will not come running to accomodate

[Anonymous No.51332757]

>>51332647
you've got it backwards
cb has already bent the knee

[Anonymous No.51332761]

>>51332647
I don't think they offer staking until v1 or v2. They're too invested into ETH staking which is more complete. As a business, what good does it do to try and participate in something capped at 75,000,000 tokens for the foreseeable future?

[Anonymous No.51332966]

>>51331883
Realizing how abstract node and neet are as terms, but I'd argue that a bunch of LPL holders who don't need to put an ounce of effort into running their group node are more neety than someone who sets up a redundant system for running a personal node. That ETH Chad in question probably has the means to get that infrastructure going, the more of a real neet you are the harder that might be to do.

[Anonymous No.51333398]

>>51332966
how many of the top 1000 wallets do you think are old biz
if you combine that you can get a pretty big boy that isnt dependent on the whims of larger institutions but makes its own decisions
ok neetnode is pretty vague but lets interpret it as running a node where we frens make all the decisions

>>51332761
yeah not now obviously linkpool will get in first but cb will eventually get their own staking, they dont pass up on free recurring money from their users like that

[Anonymous No.51334475]

>>51332321
Just curious, which part do you disagree with. Imagine holding a conference on Jan 1st and then going 9 months with nothing. You almost have to respect the arrogance and sheer disregard for the investors. Unfortunately I dont think the Sec is going to find any humor in this

[Anonymous No.51336812]

>>51326702
No. pic rel.

[Anonymous No.51336856]

>>51332039
aww someone is learning to code ain't that sweet.

[Anonymous No.51337591]

>>51326166
estimated Link staking dates is fud now

[Anonymous No.51337805]

>>51337591
Weird how people getting wrecked 90% refer to themselves as high iq. Is that the famous hiding strategy?

[Anonymous No.51337866]

>>51334475
What do you think this year means? Its pretty clear it will be soon, but 11:59pm on New years eve? Retard

[Anonymous No.51338193]

>>51337866
For the link team it means nothing. These are the same people who said staking was just about done in 2019 and that shilled a scam lending platform to their trusted community, only to pretend like nothing happenned after it went bust. Their words are meaningless, and their intergrity is nonexistant. So in summary, “this year” means they have an idea that might get implemented in the next decade. Might

[Anonymous No.51338283]

>>51338193
>intergrity
typo detected, post and opinion discounted

[Anonymous No.51338557]

>>51326166
You forgot op, it's 11.59pm Honolulu time (hst) for maximum timezone offset.

[Anonymous No.51341264]

>>51338283
Its ok to just admit youre upset at the team scamming you this year. You were prob jizzing yourself jan 1st when sergey made that arrogant coked up speech about how massive this year would be. Looking forward to seeing the karma

[Anonymous No.51341340]

>>51332163
search for "delegation" in the staking announcement

[Anonymous No.51342137]

>>51341264
lol i love getting scammed fuck you bulgarian you are probably butthurt about the pre announced staking announcement that hasnt been announced yet

[Anonymous No.51342152]

>>51333398
>how many of the top 1000 wallets do you think are old biz
As a top 1000 wallet holder I have slipped many spots over the past few years. So either old biz wallets have been buying or we are being replaced by other holders.

[Anonymous No.51342234]

>>51333398
How many top 1000 wallets are just going to put their collateral in the hands of "just trust me fren" over audited contracts though.
I feel like a lot of OGs might have invested in LINK to get away from the "just trust us customer/citizen" deals from companies and businesses.

[Anonymous No.51342261]

>>51342234
>How many top 1000 wallets are just going to put their collateral in the hands of "just trust me fren" over audited contracts though.
Doubly true after the massacres of defi and leverage since 2020. The ones that remain aren't going to get their shit out of their wallets.

[Anonymous No.51342303]

>>51342152
holders only hold link you are a fat russian scammer>>51342234
>>51342261

[Anonymous No.51342400]

>>51342303
LINK actually is objectively useless without a gas token to do things with it. Arbitrum doesn't count yet, and bridging will still have an ETH cost more than likely. Only a retard OG literally only has LINK.
Things can collaborate to do better though.
We're always going to be building on a house of cards, might as well take a few of them.

[Anonymous No.51343966]

>>51333333

[Anonymous No.51345326]

>>51328543
Neet nodes don't exist. What it does exist is staking delegators such as LinkPool. It's not necessary to buy the LPL token in order to stake LINK in their pools