MIP-26 Cancel all future V2 & V3 staking rewards and unlock all V2 stakers - Proposal


Cancel all future V2 & V3 staking rewards and unlock all V2 stakers

Authors and contributors



This proposal has been subject to 14 days discussion, together with the initial discussion post that can be found using the following link: Cancel all future V2 & V3 staking rewards and unlock all V2 stakers

The vote is live here: Snapshot.


  • Cancel the remaining V2 staking program.
  • All stakers will be unlocked from their current positions.
  • Accrued rewards will not be affected and will be able to be claimed.
  • Remaining tokens from the V2 staking program to be burned.

Specification of the proposal

The previous post in the ‘discussion’ section of the Governance forum received positive feedback from the community. This post, on the other hand, is in the ‘proposal’ section and will undergo a voting process at the appropriate time.

I am proposing the immediate cancellation of the V2 staking program, considering the substantial rewards distributed in V1 (100 million tokens) and the existing V2 rewards (30 million tokens). With the belief that sufficient rewards have already been provided to stakers, I suggest discontinuing the issuance of further rewards. Additionally, I propose that all stakers be promptly ‘unlocked’ from their chosen locked period. It is important to note that all accrued rewards in V2 will be retained, and they will no longer be subject to the 1-year vesting period, allowing stakers to claim them immediately.

Taking into consideration the remaining duration of approximately 4 months for the V2 staking program and the estimated number of tokens (10,000,000) yet to be distributed, I propose the immediate burning of these tokens. Since these tokens would have been allocated to stakers over time, eliminating them through burning ensures their removal from circulation. I am proposing that these tokens are burned as they would have been distributed out to stakers anyway.

To clarify, if this proposal is approved, all existing rewards accrued in V2 will be retained by stakers and no additional rewards will be distributed. Furthermore, the proposal suggests that all stakers will be “unlocked” from their chosen lock periods, granting them the freedom to use their assets as they see fit. This proposal aims to halt future reward distributions, while allowing stakers the flexibility to manage their assets according to their own preferences.

The immediate unlocking of all staking positions and rewards in V2 may result in increased selling pressure in the short term. However, this proposal takes into consideration the potential long-term benefits of unlocking currently locked MC tokens and stopping ongoing reward distributions. With Beam expected to launch in the fairly near future, such MC tokens could play an important role in validating transactions and securing that network, in addition to finding other use cases on Beam. While there may be initial selling pressure, it is expected that the tokens will find a more important use case in relation to Beam soon compared to under the current staking program on Ethereum.

It is worth considering that while this proposal cancels the current V2 staking program and stops further rewards, it does not preclude the possibility of implementing a new staking program or exploring alternative options in the future. The potential inclusion of validators on the Beam subnet as an alternative option is an interesting prospect, although its confirmation and implementation are yet to be determined.


There has for a longer period been negative sentiment regarding current staking on Ethereum. The proposal to cancel further rewards in the V2 staking program reflects the view that stakers have already been adequately rewarded for minimal effort. Staking on Ethereum in its current format has limited use cases for the Merit Circle ecosystem, whilst staking on Beam (through proof-of-stake) will serve the important role of validating transactions and securing the blockchain. Halting the ongoing staking v2 will make available MC tokens that enable community members to a greater degree participate in the various activities expected to occur on Beam.

The proposal to immediately stop the V2 staking program and unlock all stakers provides an opportunity for individuals to assess their commitment to the DAO. By allowing stakers to freely decide whether to continue supporting the project or sell their holdings, it will hopefully leave the DAO stronger in the long term.

It could be thought that it is unfair that 4 year stakers will have had a greater multiple APR than 1 year stakers, and while that may be true the stakers that locked for 4 years showed a greater degree of support to the DAO so they deserve the extra MC tokens they will have accrued.


The potential drawbacks of implementing this proposal is the possibility of increased volatility and selling pressure in the short term. It is true that some stakeholders may choose to sell their unlocked tokens, but as I stated before, I think this will be an opportunity for individuals to assess their commitment to the DAO, and believe that these MC tokens will find a use case (whether it’s on Beam or otherwise) for the greater benefit of the Merit Circle ecosystem, compared to if the current v2 staking (or any future iteration of it) would continue.

Additionally, by reevaluating the tokenomics and addressing the current challenges, the project can position itself more favourably for future market conditions, particularly when the sentiment turns bullish.

Community Concerns

From the initial discussion post, there were a couple of main concerns that arose:

  1. Sufficient Liquidity - with the ‘unlock’ on the LP stakers this could reduce the liquidity on Uniswap. As per the latest treasury information on the website, the DAO holds $1,519,677 with uniswap providing sufficient liquidity.

  2. Using a phased vesting period for existing V2 rewards - Considering the time and resources required for coding, auditing, and peer reviewing a contract that would be needed to implement a phased vesting period, it may not be the most efficient use of resources, especially considering the impending launch of Beam. Additionally, gradual vesting may not necessarily deter stakers from selling their rewards if they have the intention to do so. Also, if people are going to sell their rewards then they will do so whether they are vested gradually or all available immediately.


No budget apart from the devs spending time to cease staking and unlock everyone.


Are you in favour of this proposal?

  • Yes, I am in favour of this proposal
  • No, I am not in favour of this proposal
0 voters


Copyright and related rights waived via Creative Commons CC0.


Greetings, and thank you for the new proposal.

I’ve never understood why we’d need APY in such large amounts. It’s clear that it isn’t working. It’s counter-intuitive. It serves no use.

I like the V2 proposal:

You have the full support of the Ascending Galactic Federation with a “YES”.


Erik von Pumpson
Admiral of the MC Enterprise
Ascending Galactic Federation



Thank you @JGdog23 for the new proposal.

The staking program was initially introduced to encourage liquidity provision, and to encourage community growth in Merit Circle’s early days. To accommodate this, a generous 100m MC tokens were allocated for the first year of staking rewards, and more recently 30m tokens for the second year V2 staking rewards. We agree with this proposal that currently, the V2 staking rewards could be doing more harm than good.

We acknowledge that unlocking all accrued V2 rewards, as well as locked staking positions, could be beneficial in the long term. We also hope that the launch of Beam will bring greater utility to the MC token, which could encourage ecosystem participation, outside of unsustainable staking rewards.

Ultimately, we agree with the proposal’s general sentiment of and believe that we should end the current V2 staking program, and unlock all accrued V2 rewards and staking positions.

We will be voting YES to this proposal.

Signed with left paw,
Fluffy the Wizard


Small correction to avoid potential conflicts - it will be less than 4 months and ~9.5M MC tokens remaining at the time the vote is finished (not 12.5M). Beginning of V2 was around Nov-8th.



I just left my wagie so I can’t post a long post but I just wanted to say I love the MC DAO and I hope everyone is having a great summer!!! Make sure to hydrate well, and use mineral based sunscreen! I recommend CeraVe.

I will vote YES and thanks @JGdog23 for writing the proposal!!

Thank you for reading,

Honey Barrel
Vanquisher of non-Frens
The Freefolk Fellowship


1 Like

(Verse 1)
In the world of crypto, a voice did arise,
A community member, with a proposal so wise.
They said, “Let’s stop staking rewards under V2,
Unlock them all at once, and here’s what we’ll do.”

Oh, I agree with this bold suggestion,
Unlocking rewards, with a simple intention.
No more selling pressure, let’s find a new way,
Merit Circle’s proposal, let’s make it our say.

(Verse 2)
Staking rewards were once a delight,
But now they bring pressure, causing a plight.
By unlocking them all, we’ll ease the strain,
Less volatility, a chance to regain.

Oh, I agree with this bold suggestion,
Unlocking rewards, with a simple intention.
No more selling pressure, let’s find a new way,
Merit Circle’s proposal, let’s make it our say.

Let’s break the chains of the market’s fear,
Unlocking rewards, making our path clear.
Together we’ll support, and we’ll see,
A brighter future for all, we’ll believe.

Oh, I agree with this bold suggestion,
Unlocking rewards, with a simple intention.
No more selling pressure, let’s find a new way,
Merit Circle’s proposal, let’s make it our say.

(Verse 3)
As a united community, we stand as one,
Embracing the proposal, until it is done.
Unlocking rewards, bringing peace in its wake,
With Merit Circle, a new path we’ll take.

Oh, I agree with this bold suggestion,
Unlocking rewards, with a simple intention.
No more selling pressure, let’s find a new way,
Merit Circle’s proposal, let’s make it our say.

So let’s support this member, their vision so clear,
Unlocking rewards, overcoming any fear.
With Merit Circle, we’ll pave the way,
For a brighter future, as we seize the day.

[OruGPT, the best singer from Mount Puntu]


Hi MC family,

I’m here since the balancer and have staked since D1 in v1 and v2.

I’m quite confused with this proposal. Would be nice if some of you (who are more experimented than me I think) could answer these 2 questions :

1/ This kind of big changes that I never saw in other projects or DAO (correct me if I’m wrong) like the one we passed about the YGG token have really big impact. D’ont you think it can harm the perception other people and potential investors have about our MC DAO ?

2/ I don’t see how such an unlock won’t bring a huge crash in $MC value. We’re talking about 7-digit unlocking. the sell pressure will be insane ! But who gonna buy that ? Don’t you think $MC will just go sub 1 cents if the the bid size is empty ???

I prefer to wait for some answers before voting but in the current state I go for a NO to this proposal.
Thanks for those who will take time to respond and maybe change my mind :+1:


Greetings, and thanks for the new proposal.

The APY is very high and it’s a good option to stop with the V2 staking program but i like to see some alternative on BEAM first :wink:

I like most parts off the proposal.
Some questions:

  1. Why only V2 stake and no V1 stake unlock? In my opinion stop all the staking then, so MC at this point is done with staking.
  2. Why unlock all the rewards now? Isn’t it better to let the rewards unlock in the next year as planned?
    There will be a lot off selling pressure otherwise i think.
  3. Why stop immediately when there is no alternative yet?
    In my opinion better wait till Beam is ready, POS and maybe some other utility options. We talk about 9,5 million MC rewards and the selling pressure will be huge because off this unlocks.

At the moment i go for a NO to this proposal and i think it needs some finetuning!



1/ Actually, I believe the opposite is true. Standard staking systems are likely to face more and more regulatory friction, but we’re ahead of the game by handling it wisely. I’m confident that other projects will soon follow our lead. Think bigger than just text at face value. @Co_Rekt

The proposal takes a proactive approach to tackle potential regulatory challenges, and it shows that we’re ahead of the curve. This means we can navigate the regulatory landscape more smoothly, avoiding unnecessary obstacles and uncertainties.

2/ I’m not quite sure why you think that way, especially considering that the high APY is one of the main reasons we face friction in the first place. It would be better to rip off the band-aid and let the market determine which participants truly value the long-term growth of our ecosystem. The real value lies in the potential for long-term development. By minimizing delays and unnecessary friction, we create an environment where the entire ecosystem can thrive, benefitting everyone involved.

That said, even though to some a few million MC is a big number (it is to me too), as a whole it’s easily absorbed and won’t really be an issue. People who value the ecosystem will find a way.

Conclusion: Our system not only ensures proactive compliance with regulations but also reduces reliance on the APY model to foster sustainable long-term value.

Getting ready for launching the Beam blockchain, Sphere, many games, and other dApps, I think we’ll build and enjoy a really strong and valuable ecosystem that many will be able to enjoy and feel a part of. There’s something to be said about waiting for Beam, or doing it before Beam. It’s hard to decide what is best. I personally think doing it beforehand will allow people to start fresh, almost like a clean and gentle spring, with happy bees and flowers blossoming. :honeybee: :sunflower: @Jellesteen

I’m more excited than ever.

Thank you for reading,

Honey Barrel
Vanquisher of non-Frens
The Freefolk Fellowship




100% agreed with the proposal. Thank you for taking the time to write this up.t

Will vote yes.




Thank you for the correction, the proposal has now been updated. Late night maths really isn’t ideal!

1 Like

Thank you for this proposal,

I will be voting yes, as I believe staking has largely served its purpose to this point in widely distributing $MC to many.

I look forward to Beam, lowered inflation, & free market forces.


1 Like

Thanks for this proposal @JGdog23. There are various reasons why I would be happy to see the current v2 staking ending, including the anticipated launch of Beam (with proof-of-stake) where MC tokens have a proper use case. I won’t spend time on the other reasons, as I think that several others have already covered most of the points in previous replies (both here and in the other post). I only have two things to note/add:

  1. I would suggest that the proposal covers the topic voting power before discussion period is concluded, as the cessation of staking will affect that. Currently one gets boosted voting power for locking in both v2 and v1, with boost increasing with higher lock-up times. If this proposal passes, the ability to obtain added voting power would fall away, at least with respect to v2. As for those (few) still locked in v1, those also obtain added voting power (albeit lower potential boost compared to v2). I believe it makes sense to reset the voting power across the board - i.e. 1 MC = 1 vote for equal treatment (an alternative solution might appear in the future, but I think that makes sense in case we cease staking). Those providing LP (MC/ETH) could be treated equally as well, with no “added” voting power, but should not come off worse either. Curious to hear what others think about that.

  2. The proposal suggests that the unused MC tokens are burned, but I’m personally leaning more towards letting them accrue to MC DAO’s treasury. I believe we still got plenty MC tokens in our treasury (if I remember correctly following MIP-20), but the amount has decreased by a lot and any such tokens might come in handy in relation to Beam going forward (grants, other incentives for contribution etc.) - in particular considering the other deflationary mechanics already in place. I would nevertheless still vote “yes” despite no change in this regard.

1 Like


Thank for your reply. I don’t think that this would harm the perception of the DAO, in fact I think it would improve it, as removing the staking positions us to better support the Beam network and shows that we are evolving as the DAO matures. Tough decisions sometimes need to be made and although this may be painful short term, it is more than likely a benefit over the long term. And as Honey mentioned staking programs are becoming a real focus of regulatory intervention so removing this will reduce a regulatory risks.

Maybe check out the discussion thread linked at the top of the proposal as this has a bit more on the big unlocks. In short, it is better to get this done and out the way rather than continue down a path that is failing us at the moment. If something isn’t working then it is madness to continue with that process, this proposal will give us a fresh start imo and allow a free market.

1 Like


  1. V1 will be pretty much complete by November and there doesn’t seem any real need to amend this at the moment. With Beam coming unlocking everyone in V2 will allow them to decide whether to support the DAO or not, where as V1 will be finishing shortly so no real benefit making any amendments. Although it may be prudent to make sure V1 is completely shut off after November.

  2. Maybe check out the discussion thread linked at the top of the proposal as this has a bit more on the big unlocks. In short, it is better to get this done and out the way rather than continue down a path that is failing us at the moment. If something isn’t working then it is madness to continue with that process, this proposal will give us a fresh start imo and allow a free market.

  3. Having everything ready in advance of Beam releasing will allow everyone to support the network immediately. Getting a proposal approved, voted upon and implemented takes time so doing it in advance of Beam means that everyone is ready when the time comes (which will hopefully be soon).


Great proposal thank you.

I’m undecided about the burning element, and wonder too if this should maybe addressed separately? But if it stays together it’s fine and I still support the broader proposal and rationale.

Beam me up


Thanks for this proposal. I will be voting YES. Nothing to add to the posts above. I think most of us agree that staking served it’s purpose, but it is now time to move past that.

No to cancel one staking to start another in Beam.

Yes to cancel staking if we stop future issuance tokens.

If this token wants to regain market confidence it needs three simple things:

1-stop dilution. staking has done nothing for MC price.

2-publish a P&L where people can see how much of the raised funds are being used for operations and to compensate the team. What is the burn rate.

3-Keep working on games. We are rooting for you.

If the proposal is accepted as is - V1 stakers will be in unfavorable conditions (I’m not one of them - so don’t care about my own bag) - their stakes will still be locked (unlock time may vary from July to November) but new rewards will not be coming anymore (as it comes from V2 pool which will be stopped). As for me it looks not really fair already and if we get from them the voting power multiplier it will look even worse.


I have sympathy with that view, and would be ok with that personally. Possible counterpoints are that also v1 stakers’ current voting power follows from the current v2 staking, so could argue that all added voting power should cease with v2 staking ceasing. V1 stakers’ rewards since 7 November would also be unlocked, given that v1 stakers’ rewards have been running as part of v2 staking.

Regardless of the outcome on this, I think the proposal anyways should include some wording regarding this matter, so that it’s clear what happens with voting power if the proposal goes through.