[RFC] Delegation Increase Incentives System

[nick.eth]

@zeugh.eth

At this time there are very few holders that even touch that cap, and they are mostly active in the DAO and well known. This could indeed be exploited, but there will hardly be a big enough number of exploiters that would benefit from this without a big reputational damage.

Based on a hacky BigQuery query, there are over 21,000 accounts that have at least a dust amount of ENS tokens and have had for >= 180 days. Each of these would become immediately valuable as a place to put ENS tokens and immediately earn significantly more rewards.

I think you’re being entirely too casual about this; to be resistant to gaming your calculation has to take either the minimum balance over the last 180 days, or (better, IMO) sum up the balance-seconds to use as a weighting factor instead.

BigQuery query

WITH
  transfers AS (
  SELECT
    block_timestamp,
    block_number,
    log_index,
    `from` AS account,
    -CAST(value AS BIGNUMERIC) / 1e18 AS value
  FROM
    `blockchain-etl.ethereum_ens.ENSToken_event_Transfer`
  UNION ALL
  SELECT
    block_timestamp,
    block_number,
    log_index,
    `to` AS account,
    CAST(value AS BIGNUMERIC) / 1e18 AS value
  FROM
    `blockchain-etl.ethereum_ens.ENSToken_event_Transfer` ),
  balances AS (
  SELECT
    block_number,
    log_index,
    block_timestamp,
    account,
    COALESCE(SUM(value) OVER (value_window), 0) AS balance_before,
    COALESCE(SUM(value) OVER (value_window) + value, 0) AS balance
  FROM
    `transfers`
  WINDOW
    value_window AS (
    PARTITION BY
      account
    ORDER BY
      block_number,
      log_index ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING
      AND 1 PRECEDING ) )
SELECT
  block_timestamp,
  account,
  balance,
  LAST_VALUE(
    CASE
      WHEN balance_before <= 0 OR balance_before + balance <= 0 THEN block_timestamp
      ELSE NULL
  END
    IGNORE NULLS) OVER (PARTITION BY account ORDER BY block_number, log_index ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW ) AS last_zero
FROM
  `balances`
WHERE balance > 0
QUALIFY
  ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY account ORDER BY block_number DESC, log_index DESC) = 1
 AND current_timestamp - last_zero > INTERVAL 180 day
ORDER BY balance

@zeugh.eth

As the user will have a chance to win, rather than a guaranteed amount, we found it better to pool up to 10 ENS to provide a more substantial reward. Also, it reduces the number of transactions to send.

Why not set the minimum amount at 10 ENS also, though?