The Sers are a collection of NFTs that were allocated to the earliest Tempus community members. To date, more than 1,200 Sers have been minted.
You can check out the collection here:
We have previously floated some ideas about allowing Sers to be used for:
increased liquidity mining rewards (this would require the deployment of LM first, that is to be decided)
exchangeability to TEMP (this would require a careful consideration so as not to put severe inflationary pressures on TEMP, perhaps this would require either call options to be granted (could be implemented via Pods Finance etc.) or simply locked TEMP that takes a year to unlock once the Sers are redeemed).
Hi, I think that both options make sense. As for me I think that first option is greater in project’s support because it motivates you to put liquidity. Also it can potentially increase market value of these sers so it cool too. And if you want someday exit from this project you just sell it on the market and do not need to wait a time. And a buyer will became next supporter + liquidity
Perhaps rather than exchange a SER for TEMP, have a staking portal in which you stake your SER for the Temp. So, it enters the market more slowly, rewards those that hold on to it longer, and provides some utility for potential resell.
For example: X Temp is set aside, and will be delivered to those that stake their SER over the course of X years. Maybe that emmision is on a curve, so diminishes in time.
The amount of TEMP that enters the market is constant, regardless of how many SERs are staked. However, the TEMP emmitted is distributed evenly across all SER stakers. So, the less folks that state, the more a staker recieves. So, a variable APR in terms of TEMP received and based on the # staking.
Now, that’s just one piece of the “Utility” pie. Once we drive people here, why do they want to stay. Why do they care about TEMP? What additional value can we bring to TEMP in terms of utility?
I like this. I was thinking of a gamefied version where there is a reverse bonding curve for SERS. we start at each ser = 100 TEMP or so and this keeps going up as users choose to burn sers for TEMP and time. People comfortable holding sers can do so without spending gas. People who want to sell can sell. People who want to exchange can also do so easily. It also creates a price floor for the ser nfts.
100 TEMP, really? destruction of value.
I agree with David, his 2nd option. Cerses were given as awards by the ambassador, they should be rewarded. and to sell now on OpenSea or wait a year and get the greatest possible profit is the decision of the owner of sers. You need to set the value of nft (I believe that expressed in TEMP tokens is the optimal solution and this is definitely not 100TEMP….)
To me, increased liquidity mining rewards if you own/stake your Ser, makes the most sense. In the long run, it should be way better for Sers holders. Also, it will be good for the protocol itself as people who use the protocol will actually get rewards in form of liquidity mining.
The other option to exchange Ser for TEMP is very tricky. What should be the amount of TEMP you receive for Ser? Also, how to make it fair for everyone? It raises many questions. I would rather stick to increased liquidity mining rewards in this case.
Lock tokens for 1 year - its strong.
Belief in project - it’s understood, but many people will not want wait whole year and start sell NFTs, to go to zero ( ERC-20 comission not small ). + for exchange NFT to tokens TEMP you must pay comission again.
You can write like “They will sell cheap, we will buy and after 1 year take more profit”. I vote YES. But lets be honest, this history for whales, but simple ambassadors will be with nothing.
I have two variants for solution this problem.
Okay, you will lock tokens for 1 year, but at least linear unlock or for start 20% then 3 month cliff and after 8,8% per month.
Yoy will lock tokens for 12 month cliff and after 100% unlock, but for this variant you will must drop more TEMP tokens, because if you give TEMP with NFT price like market 1:1 or no much more, all people will sell NFTs with profit approximatly 0. Big wallets will earn, but not ambassadors.
If the NFTs are redeemable for TEMP in one year’s time, the NFTs will be worth almost as much as the redeemable amount will in a year’s time, discounted to take into account that they are only redeemable at a future date. The floor price of the Sers will increase to correspond to the TEMP price. Think of it as a futures contract.
Good day, everyone!
From my point of view, we can go the way the most launchpads go.
25% after 3 months
25% after 6 months
25% after 9 months
15% after 12 months
Or something like this
I don’t think that this vesting can crush Tempus system, only if you’re planning to give really a lot of tokens for each NFT.
even if calculated for 1 nft = 5000 TEMP, calculated using today’s circulating TEMP it would be 25% (with a vesting per year this will not lose value). and if we count from the total circulation of tokens, this is only 7% of the total circulation, this is very little. it does not reduce the price, does not exaggerate.
let’s be honest, most ambassadors are waiting for any kind of awards, in fact, NFT has a rarity, I hope it somehow affects the price, right?
even if we imagine the situation that for 1 nft -10k temp is a drop in the ocean,
despite the fact that there was no dex listing and project marketing.
If only our community knows about temp, then what price are we talking about? (This is for marketing)
therefore I do not understand people who are surprised by the price and why not yet on the moon.
loсk, I understand we play for the long haul, but most of it is not interesting since they are not whales of the market.
1.distribute rewards to ambassadors, and leave locks for large wallets.
2. Sers of the blockchain metaverse, right?
so can nft be used in P2E? (in the future) who thought about it?
Logic is simple no awards to ambassadors - then there are no ambassadors
Let’s just be reasonable first of all about the rewards that Ambassadors will get. This needs to be proportional to the value they provided in the first place.
Giving 10k TEMP ($1,400 at the time of writing) in exchange from completing a single mission (e.g. making a tweet from an account with zero followers) does no good for anyone. It totally undermines our tokenholders, the values we uphold, and sends the wrong message to them, by Tempus giving away a lot of value as a gift, in exchange for very little.
You’re suggesting no lock because you don’t want to wait, so this would be something like $2 - 2.5 million of sell pressure which could potentially make the TEMP price drop by more than 50%. What kind of “Ambassador” is in favour of this?
Ultimately, this is for TEMP holders to decide, because they are the ones who are affected. If the consensus is to do this, the Tempus team will go ahead and implement it, but so far I haven’t seen any of our large holders support something like this.
Leave lock for large wallets - what does this mean? What’s a large wallet? Do you mean a wallet that holds more than 1 NFT? It makes no sense to discriminate like this because the system can be played easily by holding NFTs in different wallets.
I am a holder of NFT and tokens, please tell me why I participated in TGE, why I participated in the Ambassador program and defended your project so vehemently in order to understand later that NFT is worth nothing? I took the tokens at such a price that in 3 years the benefit will reach my entry point. Unfortunately, you have devalued the work of ambassadors who not only made posts, but a lot of other things) Think about it and how your project will work without us (ambassadors) and good cases in cryptoworld, just think. I don`t need anything of your project, cause I see how you appreciated our work. Just think.
David, I think that 5000 TEMP is quite an adequate reward for participating in the ambassadorship. as the person said earlier, “Logic is simple no awards to ambassadors - then there are no ambassadors”. people took the time, a lot of people were involved in making the video (it’s hard to do). I will say this, many TEMP holders have nft, so it’s not right to say that making a good reward for asbasadors is not right for holders. people were given many times more for participating in various programs, ambassadors would be very happy even with a good allocation during the sale of project tokens (if there was good marketing, and not sale on a balancer). and lastly, no one is against locked tokens for participating in ambassadorship, you can just do a linear unlock and this will not affect TEMP prices in any way.
I personally don’t pretend to be 10k at all, it was just an example and you didn’t understand me, I talked about what marketing and dex need, again an example of 10k-1400$ (now) and when the price is 1$-1.4k tokens, there is difference? $1 is not the ceiling.
I would like to write a few comments from myself, and then I’ll summarize constructively.
I don’t fully agree with the position “Giving 10k TEMP ($1,400 at the time of writing) in exchange from completing a single mission”. For example, I received 1 NFT, but completed all the tasks. The distribution of NFT was random, so in order to get at least 1 NFT, you had to complete all the tasks.
The Tempus team has set a lofty goal for the value of NFTs. In one of the AMA sessions, you replied that you would aim for an NFT value of $3,000 per NFT. This was not invented by ambassadors or subscribers, this is how your team answered.
Now there are 65 million coins on the market, 1220 holders. There are 3333 NFTs in total. If 10,000 coins are rewarded for 1 NFT, then the amount of rewards will be 33.3 million coins, which is approximately 50% of the current turnover (coins of all holders). Linear unlocking would be the best option in this case.
What NFT exchange options do coin holders offer / want (remember, there are 1220 of them)?
Isn’t it obvious that coin holders and ambassadors are equally important to the project? If the ambassadors are not active, is there any certainty that the popularization of the project will grow by itself?
It seems to me that the smaller the reward for 1 NFT, the faster the coins will be sold) Recipients of the reward will get upset and just sell everything in order to leave the project as soon as possible. Do you think there is such a risk?
You are faced with the task of how to make WIN-WIN-WIN (project, holders, ambassadors).
My opinion is that the number of tokens per NFT should be quite large. Take DYDX as an example. Thanks to the fact that they generously rewarded their community, every dog now knows about them. Create an an information bomb. Let it be part of your marketing. Win-win.