I’m not sure how much agreement I will get but I’d like to have a discussion at least about this.
Currently, I’m staked partially in REN but don’t want to unstake and lose the reward multiplier in my other larger pools so it’s kinda just sitting there not really doing anything outside of the ILP. Don’t get me wrong that part is good.
It doesn’t seem to incentivize people to stake BNT into anything but “the majors” if you lose multipliers after the rewards period runs out. I feel like this is an opportunity to course-correct to bring more of the non-BNT side of the pairings into the LPs.
I feel like the same thing is going to happen to me with GRT in a few weeks and I’m staked on both sides. Obviously, it’s not all about me but I’d imagine that others are thinking this as well when they pick a pool. Why would you pick a pool when there wouldn’t be an extension?
I remember when the stable pool rewards were cut this was a point of contention. It seems like as rewards aren’t extended they should be tapered off. If there are 30 days remaining in a rewards program but you aren’t sure it would be extended why would you stake into that pool? So you’re killing off any potential liquidity into those pools that aren’t getting extended or in some cases they aren’t even being voted on (REN extension wasn’t voted on to extend I beleive).
Maybe they should automatically go up for a vote in advance of expiration?