Some fantastic ideas about staking rewards, token prices, and the direction of community governance development

t’s just an idea.
Staker rewards are paid out by the treasury,The relayer fee is converted into TORN and sent to the treasury.
The purpose of this is that when Tornado Cash is used by more people, they will buy more tokens with handling fees.
Assuming a month’s repeater expenditure is about 50,000 TORN.
These rewards go directly to those stakers (including those who never participated in governance votes).
The worst idea is that the governors get the tokens and sell them directly, so the price of the tokens may be difficult to break through upwards.
So I draw from the idea of HEX:Governance users who vote get block rewards,Ordinary stakers are rewarded with an annual interest rate of 10% (can be voted on).
Each proposal will have a fixed reward, which can be determined according to the average transaction fee paid by the repeater. For example, 70% of the transaction fee is used for block rewards. Every user who participates in the locking vote will share the block rewards together.
The main purpose is that when more and more people use Tornado Cash, the fee will buy more TORN.
The more TORN in the treasury, the more voting users earn more,With more money in the vault we can better maintain the project,The more people vote, the more active the community will be,Ordinary stakers get more stable returns.

Summary: Voting users get more benefits Relay spending fees are used to buy and deposit TORN Ordinary stakers get more stable benefits.

admin will this be possible?

Why is the price of tokens changing all the time, but the number of tokens supported by the repeater is the same? Isn’t the fee calculated by ETH?

This may finally come out with a result that people vote for the benefit without thinking.
If there are no need to have a proposal in a long period, people will come out will some meaningless proposal just for taking out the token. I dont think it is good idea to link the benefit and voting in this way.
Especially in tokenomic, it can be broken with just any single step wrong. it should be detailly discuss and thinking together when toughing this piece of area.

A better solution should be build up another way which can earn money to governance such as LP? and use that new income to reward the paticipant rather than damaging the existing tokenomic system.

1 Like

My idea is to build on repeater support. When there are no proposals, tokens are sent to the treasury instead of being distributed to users. Repeaters continue to use to buy TORN and reduce a small amount of selling, the price of this token will rise, and the user’s income will also increase

We can rest assured that proposal managers will review it for us

Sorry, this is too complicated for me, I just pay attention to the monitoring channel, the number of tokens distributed to pledgers corresponding to each withdrawal will not change due to the tearing price

Think clearly: TORN is purchased when someone uses Tornado Cash and these tokens are deposited into the vault, Only participating in the proposal can be divided. Ordinary pledgers can obtain stable income distributed by the treasury.

I don’t agree with you, your idea will encourage more proposals, and the more proposals, the higher the probability of code bugs. A good system should have strong adaptability and compatibility, and should not have many proposals.

1 Like

The block reward will not be higher than the repeater expenditure. If you want to get the voting income, you need to lock the token, and the proposal release can be restricted

is this for voting activity? or to store more torn? I think torn holders should make their own decision on the adoption of the proposal without incentives. And there is no need to complicate the staking system. It’s better to develop nova, for example, or more important problems, which are enough, than to offer such nonsense as children. Excuse me

1 Like

Great idea, will it be difficult to implement?

Miner fees are unacceptable to general managers. How many people are really willing to contribute to the community?

I think the current goal is that users of Tornado Cash can buy TORN through the withdrawal fee and deposit it in the vault. After that, the price of the token will rise, and more and more people will use and participate. This is the goal.

It’s absurd to judge others’ participation in governance based on whether they vote or not. Holding tokens, staking tokens, are the best proof of stake. There’s no need for you to deprive them of that.

1 Like

The reason for the current unsatisfactory token price is not whether you have governed or not, It’s we are hacked, dude~

It’s best not to make too many modifications to the contract to ensure its security. Have you forgotten? There were plenty of cheating relayers before, yet the token price still reached $10. Until we were hacked, and the reason we were hacked is because we didn’t review the code.

no they will get a steady income

Just because of being attacked, we need to make changes to make the token price rise

Some codes cannot be 100% safe even if they are audited

We can try a new model to bring the token price back to 100$ or more