Improved RARI distribution

What I had in mind is some sort of ladder system, where each step would decrease the value of Ξ1 in volume. So lets quickly make up some steps for the example:

Ξ0 - Ξ10 - (100%)
Ξ10 - Ξ20 - (80%)
Ξ20 - Ξ30 - (60%)
Ξ30 - Ξ40 - (40%)
Ξ40+ - (20%)

Example 1: You generate Ξ14 in sales volume this week, your first Ξ10 will count for 100% towards your weekly volume, but the remaining Ξ4 will fall into the next bracket which means that the remaining Ξ4 will count for 80%.

Example 2: You generate Ξ37 in sales volume this week, your first Ξ10 will count for 100% towards your weekly volume, and the next Ξ10 will count for 80%, the next Ξ10 will count for 60% and the final Ξ7 will count for 40% towards your weekly volume.

I am sure there are some flaws to be worked out but this would be a significant improvement in the distribution. Right now one big artist is able to take an absurd large portion out of the weekly allocation, negatively impacting the smaller artists on the platform.

25 Likes

I think this is better then it is now.

5 Likes

This is my suggestion from Nolt, so if anyone wants to talk about it with me feel free to tag me in future discussions.

2 Likes

I had no idea such a criteria was in place, I thought it was something random. Am so glad the distribution is fair.

1 Like

@Juzitu this is not in place, this is a suggestion.

2 Likes

I had no idea, how exactly does distribution works? Just the amount of sales and buys determine how much you earn? It is easy to manipulate the system then😪

1 Like

may I ask you to link me to the current contract, to check exactly what is written about distribution? and maybe a link to the applied rules in case of wash trading doubt? It could be helpful to me to respond to some friend interested in joining (but scared of the rules, that seem, are applied randomly)
Thanks :slight_smile:

I was there before RARI and choosed the platform for simpaty, so I am not so prepared on respond about token :slight_smile:

Great suggestion, Neon. 100% for this…

1 Like

I think something like a progressive decay should be introduced. The same as with taxes in western countries. I believe 40ETH+ should have like 50% off not 20% because this way we never get to incentivize big players to get on the platform

4 Likes

The numbers I used were just an example. But I do want to point out that your comment is basically implying that big artists won’t join Rarible unless they get massive free bonuses, that makes no sense. Every artist is earning ETH for their artworks, the RARI is simply a bonus. If you implement a weak system were big artists still receive an enormous cut of the weekly drop you will end up like SuperRare were a small group of artists are calling the shots.

All I can ask is please do not implement a weak system that will just result in a select group of artists still being able to punish smaller artists by generating massive volume.

1 Like

Can we collectively come up with a number to vote on?

2 Likes

Ξ0 - Ξ10 - (100%)
Ξ10 - Ξ20 - (25%)
Ξ20 - Ξ30 - (20%)
Ξ30 - Ξ40 - (15%)
Ξ40+ - (10%)

If you really want to support your up-and-coming artists and make this a platform “for the people”, then what percent would fall in the first tier (which should be the focus imo)? Let’s say 95%+ of people, I am just guessing. This would pretty much disincentive massive “whale” artists looking to just reap from Rarible… and don’t get too upset, you still SOLD your art and still getting RARI. These values could be even lower imo, but just pitching an alternative.

4 Likes

100 percent agree on that

1 Like

Even if this is not the final solution, this should be implemented asap to help curve the currently heavily skewed distribution methods.

4 Likes

I agree with this 100% after a while it gets pretty defeating when you see someone hop up on the leader board with like 50 eth…

especially all the people putting in like 10 eth just kinda end up wasting their money. just makes you feel like you are gonna totally lose out on that eth you spent (even though you have some sick nfts now)

1 Like

Completely agreed on this. Whales just becoming larger whales :frowning:

This cant come quickly enough. Please push this forward

1 Like

@AlexSalnikov I’ve been doing a little bit of research into this and a Sigmoid function seems to be something that might be worth looking into.

Unknown

For example, in the image above, you can clearly see how the reward function grows accordingly to the sigmoid graph, where, the reward is normalised to a factor of [0, 1].

This would allow us to restrict the total amount of rewards that are allocated to whales so distribution of the tokens are less-densely concentrated towards these actors. In effect, medium size sellers/buyers will also benefit greatly from this as they’re be much more incentivised since they reward distribution is not affected greatly but slowly reduces as they start reaching the higher threshold of the sigmoid function.

Hope this helps :). Feel free to drop me a PM If you’d like to discuss this further.

Something needs to be done ASAP. There are a lot of unhappy users out there today @AlexSalnikov. Two weeks ago when big money players discovered the power of $RARI, all the little guys got their RARI distributions cut down to nothing. I would guess that the majority of the buyers and sellers on the platform do less than 1 ETH worth of buying or selling a week.

4 Likes