Proposed Addendum to SLURP-40 Eligibility Criteria: Stake Calculation Method
Context: To finalize the BUILD Reward Distribution outlined in SLURP-40 and ensure a timely go-live for Season Genesis, a decision is required on the method used to determine the eligible stake amount for participants (Season Genesis only).
Proposal: The DAO must decide between two methods for calculating the stake amount used for determining eligibility and/or distribution weights for Season Genesis:
Option 1: Time-Weighted Average Stake
Calculate the average stake held by participants over a defined period.
Snapshot/Cutoff Date: Use data up to March 31st, 2025, to calculate this time-weighted average.
Option 2: Status Quo Stake Snapshot
Use the amount of stake held by participants at a specific point in time.
Snapshot Date: Use the stake data as of May 5th, 2025 (coinciding with the date of the related Chainlink blog post).
Curve LPs Treatment: Curve LPs eligbility will be calculated based on total amount of tokens in pool (LINK and stLINK) divided by 2 incase of an imbalance.
Rationale for Urgent Decision: A swift resolution on the stake calculation method is crucial for the stake.link team and DAO to proceed with the technical implementation and distribution process without delay for Season Genesis.
Call to Action: We urge the stake.link community and DAO members to discuss, so the Council can vote on these two options promptly (within 36hrs) to establish the definitive stake calculation method for the SLURP-40 BUILD reward distribution.
From my personal perspective the DAO should decide for Option 2 since we are a liquid staking protocol that can be traded in and out easily in contrast to native staking where you are locked for a longer time frame. To embrace the concept of being liquid fully the calculation method should be based on Status Quo Stake Snapshot.
Appreciate the quick post to address this. adding what I’ve wrote on telegram, I am also in favor of option #2:
-user friendly and streamline the entire thing: if you held stLINK by May 5th, you are eligible.
-stLINK in/out dumpoors can’t game it
-also indirectly maximize the returns of users who held consistently for longer periods, as they were exposed to more rebases and are therefore entitled to more rewards.
-not penalizing those who got into stLINK the last months, making it a fairer distro
Thank you for posting this so quickly, @Asymmetric. The urgency of this measure is more than justified given the short notice between CLL’s announcement and the go-live date of the Chainlink Rewards initiative. Sending an addendum is definitely the right approach.
With that said, I’d like to share my personal thoughts:
We should differentiate ourselves from CLL’s time-weighted average to better reflect the liquid nature of our protocol.
Using a different snapshot than CLL provides additional perceived value for us.
Ignoring the time-weighted average offers some advantages.
Rationale for the advantages:
We would avoid rewarding users who dumped stLINK or withdrew it from the pool before an arbitrary date. Instead, rewards would be based on the release of the blog post — when the information was made public — ensuring there is no way to game the system.
We would also indirectly maximize the returns of users who held consistently for longer periods, as they were exposed to more rebases and are therefore entitled to more rewards.
Additionally, at the same time we would avoid penalizing users who recently acquired stLINK via Curve, for example. Under this approach, everyone is treated equally.
Regarding technical limitations:
Using a pure snapshot-based method makes the entire process cleaner and easier for the engineering team.
For the reasons stated above, I would lean toward option #2. I’m happy to hear the community’s thoughts on this or any feedback.
would unclaimed stLINK (both SDL staking rewards in the form of stLINK and stLINK from priority pool stakes) be counted in the snapshot? i’m assuming so?
I understand that the build programme has many projects and that Space and Time are the first of many to distribute some percentage to the stakers etc. I understand that you are trying to be fair to all in terms of their commitment to chainlink /stake.link. However I think you need to think of a formula which will encourage future holders to stake also. For example if one stakes link in June 2025 are they to be excluded from Build rewards? It would be much better to make it clear that once you have staked for a certain period of time (say 6 months), that you then become eligible for future build rewards. This would allow future stakers to participate in rewards from future Build participants. Also I understand that rewards from the many current Build participants may not be forthcoming until some time in the future, depending on success etc. will future/new holders/stakers be eligible to receive these rewards.
Encouraging new holders/stakers is important as the foundations need to get stronger as the DE/FI uses expand.
As this is a pretty fundamental point, I apologise if you have already discussed this but, I have not seen it spelt out in non technical terms that I can understand.
Really exciting to see BUILD rewards coming together. Huge thanks to the team and Council for moving so quickly and thoughtfully on this.
Option 2 seems the most fair for the broader community.
That said, I’d like to suggest we consider using may 8th, corresponding with CLL as the snapshot date. It still honors the long-term stakers (since nothing major shifts in a few days), but gives just enough time to capture growing interest in stLINK, especially following the blog post and recent buzz. This small adjustment could spark more demand, drive engagement from new participants, and shine a bigger spotlight on the protocol at just the right time.
It’s a simple move that could make the BUILD program even more powerful as a growth and awareness lever.
Curious to hear your opinions and thank you again to the team.
It is likely that there will be future Chainlink Reward Seasons and a new Snapshot is taken at the time of announcement. This is not foreseeable now. This Addendum is for the Chainlink Rewards Season Genesis. It should be clear that a liquid staking protocol makes you elligible for future Seasons should there be any.
For technical execution and error reduction the snapshot should be in the past. We want to ensure that everyone is able to claim as close as possible to the official date.
thanks for the reply, Sorry if my query was not appropriate on this thread. I am not sure what Season Genesis is?
Is there clear guidance somewhere that spells out the rules about how much and how long you have to have staked in order to qualify for Build rewards? Similarly is there guidance for any future stakers in terms of what they can earn from the build programme on top of the percentage reward from staking?
Would I be better advised to open these queries in a new thread?
imo we wouldn’t be “penalizing” new stakers. I don’t think (or least I hope) that someone joined SDL a month ago expecting to get full 2 years worth of build rewards from day 1.
I think some manner of smoothing out the rewards curve is in order (snapshotting everything would be a nightmare) but 1:1 feels bad.
And I don’t understand the notion that “well yeah the first wallets to use SDL got to enjoy higher rewards so they’ve already got there’s”. We did indeed. And we’ve been screaming from the mountaintops for others to join and are now the ones being “penalized” for it, even if long term it could be good for the protocol.
After thinking about this some more today here’s where I’m at (will post this to the forum as well).
even distribution is good for the protocol. It can incentivize someone to stake here rather than CLL (outside of the higher rewards)
my first stLINK gets less, but also my stLINK added later gets more so that’s a plus.
CLL doing time weighted rewards is actually really good as far as rewarding OGs but tbh I’m surprised they even did it. It wouldn’t surprise me to see it change in the future where things are no longer a snapshot. Who knows tho.
We have no idea what tomorrow looks like for staking. We should try to attract as many new link stakers and SDL buyers as possible and if sacrificing a bit of build rewards does it, I’m for it.
there will probably be people who leave CLL staking to join SDL staking specifically because they realize they’re sort of getting extra build. Time for when they staked at CLL and then a flat rate at SDL. Again bullish for us.
So overall stLINK OG stakers get a bit of a short term L, but we get protocol growth, more SDL rewards (everyone does hold both right?), a solution that can actually be implemented in 3 days and a future proofed solution provided CLL continues this go forward.
To offset any disincentives with the new Curve pool and higher slippage tolerance, I would propose that for the purpose of BUILD that rewards are always distributed as if the pool is always equal by calculating the amount of stLINK liquidity by sum of both of LINK & stLINK then halved.
Outside of that, I have no strong opinions between time-weighted or straight airdrop based on previous date.
Hi Jonny and thank you for bringing this up. That seems like the most fair option for LPs.
I believe Option 2 is the best considering all factors.
Cheers
To the stake.link Team and Community,
Regarding the upcoming decision on how to distribute Chainlink BUILD program rewards, I strongly advocate for adopting a time-weighted distribution model.
Here’s why this approach is beneficial for stake.link and its participants:
Rewards Long-Term Commitment & Early Support: A time-weighted system inherently values consistency and early participation. It recognizes and rewards participants who commit their resources to stake.link over extended periods, rather than solely focusing on the total amount contributed at a specific snapshot. This fosters a more loyal and stable participant base.
Fairness to Consistent Supporters: This model ensures that those who have supported stake.link from the earlier stages or maintained their support consistently receive rewards proportional not just to what they contributed, but also how long they have been contributing. This is arguably a fairer reflection of their overall value and commitment to the project’s success.
Participation Focus, Independent of Token Liquidity: The liquidity of the stLINK token, while beneficial for holders, doesn’t diminish the rationale for time-weighted rewards. BUILD rewards are fundamentally earned through active participation and contribution to stake.link’s objectives within the program (e.g., staking LINK through the platform). Time-weighting incentivizes the duration of this active platform engagement, which is distinct from simply holding or trading the stLINK token on the open market. It ensures rewards are directed towards sustained commitment to the program’s goals via stake.link, irrespective of the token’s secondary market dynamics.
Promotes Stability: By incentivizing participants to keep their contributions active over time, this model discourages “reward farming” where participants might jump in late only to capture rewards without contributing to the project’s sustained growth. This leads to a more predictable and stable environment for stake.link’s BUILD efforts.
Aligns with Ecosystem Best Practices (Chainlink Labs): Significantly, Chainlink Labs itself utilizes a time-weighted approach for distributing rewards within the BUILD program. Adopting the same methodology aligns stake.link with the core principles and practices established by the Chainlink ecosystem leaders. This demonstrates a commitment to the established standards and suggests it’s a proven, effective model within this specific context.
Implementing a time-weighted distribution model sends a clear message that stake.link values sustained participation and long-term alignment within the BUILD program itself. It encourages the kind of stable, committed support that is vital for growth and success. Aligning with the method used by Chainlink Labs further reinforces this as a sound and well-considered approach.
Therefore, I believe adopting a time-weighted distribution system is the most equitable and strategically advantageous path forward for distributing stake.link’s BUILD rewards.
