[HIP] Upgrade rewards expiration algorithm

Proposal Structure

Simple Summary:

This proposal is aimed to change rewards expiration algorithm. With current Ethereum Mainnet high gas fees, some users are not ready to claim low amounts of HFT tokens, as a result, some NFT rewards may expire. With this solution, the new minimal thresholds will be set: 1000+ HFT for 60-days expiration period (after reaching the amount, expiration algorithm will be triggered) and 365-days period for less than 1000 tokens. Also Unvested rewards will be excluded from the algorithm.


The are 3 points in this proposal:

Change expiration algorithm

  1. The minimum threshold of “1000 unclaimed HFT” will be set at which “60-days” expiration algorithm is triggered.
  2. For rewards that are less than 1000 HFT (<1000), timelines will be changed. Instead of using 60 days I suppose to use 365-days period, so users with low amounts will have an opportunity to claim within a year.

Create additional alert
As soon as the algorithm is triggered (user earns >= 1000.00 HFT), user will see new alert in UI with message “n days left before m tokens expire”.

Eliminate unvested rewards from the algorithm
Since these rewards are unvested, I believe that they should not fall under the criteria of the expiration algorithm. However this solution will not apply to the vested (unlocked) ones, they still can be expired.


By implementing this proposal we’ll improve the expiration algorithm, so more users will be able to accumulate unclaimed rewards without the need to claim low amounts of tokens every 60 days. Also NFT rewards holders won’t need to worry about their unvested token.

Specification & Rationale:

This proposal would require Hashflow team to upgrade the algorithm and create a new alert.

Benefits (Pros):

  • more users will have the opportunity to claim rewards
  • users will get notified about exact number of days they have to claim their rewards
  • unvested rewards cannot expire

Downside (Cons):

  • n/a


  • yes for the algorithm to be changed
  • no to keep current logic of algorithm

@tD1 I think this proposal is in the spirit of creating fairness and helping the community grow. I would like to double check the formal specification of the algorithm you’re proposing:

  • no unvested HFT will ever be expired
  • if it has been more than 60 days since the amount of HFT went over 1000 HFT then expire all currently claimable HFT
  • if it has been more than a year since the wallet has received any amount of claimable HFT, then expire all currently claimable HFT

Does that sound correct?

1 Like

Why not target HFTs that have already expired?
It is clearly unfair.
This will not stop the uproar.

It is only fair to include NFT rewards that have already expired.

1 Like

Do unvested rewards include NFT rewards?

Why not bail out users whose NFT rewards have expired because they have not previously claimed a small HFT?

Why this is happen to only the future expired rewards? How about people who had issued already. They should have their own right on this matter too.

This is unfair to other people that have got the issues on this previous proposal. It is human error mistake on both the proposal creating/ the UI and misunderstanding on the proposal of users. If the last proposal is not that good enough, we should fixed it and resolved all problems for everyone.

We should state and clarify more about the expired rewards on the unvested NFT rewards that has been transferred to into the treasury already this proposal too. DAO have to return all of NFT unvested token from the expired rewards that is in the treasury back to the users too.

This will make a fair algorithm to all users in the community. It is not just to solve the future problem, but also need to fix and manage the problem now too.

Please increase the scope and include all the expired tokens. It will be fair to everyone.

Yep, everything is correct

Yes. Unvested NFT rewards are under “unvested rewards” definition. However unlocked ones are not. For example, you have 30k unvested HFT rewards. If you get 5k unlocked and don’t claim them within given period of time (60 days), they’ll be expired.

In my opinion, we should clarify more about the unvested token that have been expired too especially on the unvested NFT rewards. A lot of users have got the same issue that all of their unvested NFT rewards has effected on the last expired algorithm. The last proposal was not fair then we have this new proposal to fix the last one.
So, we need to make it fair to every users/ OG and Hashgang in both the future and in the past too. Please add more fairness about the unvested expired token that effected by the last proposal that should return fairly to all users. This should be the fairness way to the Hashflow community.

@nyo @1.1 @pratikmbm1122 this proposal is about changing the algorithm logic. If you want to do something with expired rewards, please, create a new proposal about that. We can’t discuss the problem of expired rewards in this proposal, since it would not be clear for voting.

Please, create a different proposal for this topic and check the message above

i think it would need more metrics for amount of HFT to decide of expiration algorithm. “1000 unclaimed HFT” does not stand for anything. should be based on the amount that did happend on chain on expiration.

Hmm, interesting. What metrics do you want to see?

@tD1 @gxmxni “It’s not different cases. The problem stems from the same root cause. Therefore, the cause of both cases is the same problem. If you write a new proposal, you should mention that the expired HFT tokens, which were transferred to the HFT Foundation, should be returned to the original owners of the HFT. Both cases result from the same root problem: unvested reward expiration. The expired and non-expired rewards stem from the same solution. (This proposal aims to change the rewards expiration algorithm. Due to high gas fees on the Ethereum Mainnet, some users are hesitant to claim small amounts of HFT tokens, resulting in the expiration of certain NFT rewards. With this solution, new minimum thresholds will be established: 1000+ HFT for a 60-day expiration period (the expiration algorithm will be triggered once this threshold is reached), and a 365-day period for amounts less than 1000 tokens. Additionally, unvested rewards will be exempt from the algorithm.) Both cases share the same circumstances, and the root problem is identical. Why create two different proposals? Simply add the following line below: :thinking: ‘For expired rewards triggered by this problem, the HFT Foundation will return them to their rightful owners, and the vesting schedule for these rewards will remain unchanged.’”

Why did you even bother with NFT users? Why is the HFT community solely focused on the issue of NFT user tokens? Do you think they’ve influenced the HFT price? And what about users who received 100% unlocking initially and sold everything? The HFT community seems solely dedicated to limiting NFT users and their rewards. I support the idea of returning unvested tokens to all users whose tokens were transferred to the treasury due to 60 days of inactivity. In fact, I believe that all unvested tokens should be fully unlocked. Yes, the price may drop initially, but those who want to sell will sell, and they will no longer exert downward pressure on the price if that’s what concerns you so much.

For tokens that have already been expired, the expiring should be lifted if it is consistent with this proposal.
Many users were unaware of the expiration announcement. They are early users who spent a lot of time and money on hashflow and supported hashflow’s bootstrapping.

This is a good proposal to perfect the 60-day expiration algorithm as the DAO learns from trial and error.

This should be passed in conjunction with this proposal ( [RFC] Re-assign forfeited grants from unvested tokens and make unvested token grants un-expirable ) that addresses the issue with unvested tokens that were affected by the 60-day rule and forfeited.

With these two proposals accepted:

  1. Unvested tokens that were forfeited will be re-granted (revert the forfeiture)
  2. Unvested tokens cannot be forfeited again (unvested tokens excluded from the 60-day rule)
  3. The 60-day rule is improved for future to mitigate small users having to waste gas on Ethereum to protect their rewards that can sometimes be worth less than the gas to spend to claim them

Please add past rewards to the scope.

Stakers currently lose all of their staking rewards if they make a trade on the platform and earn trading rewards but don’t claim within 60 days. If they don’t trade however, their staking rewards are safe from expiring. Surely, everyone can see the problem with this?

Stakers are also active by staking. Locking up their HFT for any amount of time is being active and involved in the platform. Their staking rewards should be safe from expiring, regardless of when they claim.

As a staker, I have no incentive to trade on the platform anymore after losing my staking rewards that I had let accumulate. I let them build as gas fees make it impractical to claim regularly.

Hi @spiralgat3way, this is a very valid point and it has been now included in my proposal [RFC] Re-assign forfeited grants from unvested tokens and make unvested token grants and staking rewards un-expirable which now aims to restore both staking rewards and unvested rewards that were affected by the 60-day rule.

As suggested by @gxmxni there is merit to also changing the algorithm to 365 days instead of 60, see more here: [RFC] Re-assign forfeited grants from unvested tokens and make unvested token grants and staking rewards un-expirable - #7 by gxmxni

I would recommend @tD1 to consider this idea and possibly propose changing the period to 365 days