Reputation tokenomics: Difference between revisions

From DAO Governance Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Text replacement - "Availability smart contract" to "availability smart contract")
Line 9: Line 9:
* security tokens such as BONDs
* security tokens such as BONDs
* equities such as investor tokens
* equities such as investor tokens
* ForEx instruments such as [[Stable coin governance|stable coins]]
* ForEx instruments, such as [[Stable coin governance|stable coins]] and their markets
* derivatives such as calls and puts.
* commodities, such as NFTs
* derivatives, such as calls and puts.


== Overview ==
== Overview ==

Revision as of 23:47, 23 April 2023

Reputation tokenomics is the economic analysis of the value of REP tokens in a DAO. This page assumes standard DGF mechanisms for REP minting and distribution using the Validation Pool and the Forum. REP tokenomics studies the economic consequences of these assumptions for reputation token design.

The fundamental results of reputation tokenomics derive from analyzing the effects of parameter changes in the REP Token Minting Mechanism. Models for REP token evolution depend on assumptions such as the rate of fees the DAO earns to share in its REP salary. The analysis follows by determining the income stream of a REP token due to this REP salary, which is equalized over time by calculating its present value.

The results of REP tokenomics help guide governance decisions. The formulas derived from tokenomics give us more precise intuition for how to manipulate the parameters to drive the system toward different goals. For instance, a DAO may choose to change the number of tokens minted when fees enter the system (a parameter denoted by ). The analysis shows how default inflationary minting of REP encourages decentralization, and to what degree parameter choices strengthen or weaken the effect. Such calculations precisely account for how different types of members (especially older or newer members) benefit from different DAO governance decisions, which clarifies the true moral principles the DAO embodies. This allows us to compare the functioning of a DAO against its marketing, in order to objectively evaluate the group’s values and integrity.[1]

The formulas derived help us to rigorously program financial instruments:

  • security tokens such as BONDs
  • equities such as investor tokens
  • ForEx instruments, such as stable coins and their markets
  • commodities, such as NFTs
  • derivatives, such as calls and puts.

Overview

Reputation tokenomics is a sub-discipline within general tokenomics, which is a sub-discipline of finance, which is a sub-discipline of economics. Tokenomics is the study of the value of digital tokens in online networks, originally blockchain based.

There are many valuable blockchains and DHT networks holding digital financial tokens that fall under the domain of interest for tokenomics. The digital tokens of greatest interest are Bitcoin, ETH, and the sub-tokens of Ethereum, typically fungible ERC-20 tokens[2] representing ownership of DAOs and non-fungible ERC-721 tokens[3], called NFTs, representing ownership of individual properties.

These tokens fall under the financial instrument categories of equities, securities, commodities, and utilities. However, most current tokens are combinations of these types. For example, the basic token of the Ethereum network, ETH, confers on its owner the power of using the network for information processing and storage, because it is used to pay the network to run smart contracts. Therefore, the primary argument holds that ETH is a utility token. However, ETH has also been used in the past to make governance decisions.[4] Therefore ETH also has some properties of an equity in the quasi-corporation that is the Ethereum network. ETH also has some aspects of a security, since the governance design has chosen to limit the quantity of ETH in the hopes that it will grow in value.

There is an active legal argument concerning what type of financial instruments these tokens represent for the purposes of national and international regulation. However, since Ethereum is not centrally incorporated, its governance is not structured like any traditional corporation. Therefore its regulation arguably falls outside the scope of the SEC in the US or the ESMA in Europe. (See Main article: Legal regulatory issues for DAOs.)

REP tokens under DGF similarly overlap these financial categories. They are utilities in that they confer the power to obtain work through the availability smart contract. They may be equities if they are the type of REP that confers power over governance in the DAO. Our primary concern in reputation tokenomics is a REP token's value as a security. REP tokens have the quality of securities in the sense that they are a type of annuity, since they hold claim over any future fees the DAO earns through the REP salary.

REP Valuation

Basic parameters

REP valuation models are based on the following parameters:

  1. the total number of REP tokens in the DAO at time .
  2. The rate of total fees that the DAO earns. Therefore  denotes the total fees earned from the beginning of the DAO until time .
  3. is the cumulative reputational salary collected for one token from start time  when the token was minted until time . This is our function of primary concern. After determining its formula, we are most interested in its present value .
  4. is the minting ratio. This is the proportion of REP tokens that are minted relative to the fees the DAO collects. The default assumption is .
  5. is the base interest rate of the economy. Depending on the context this can alternately denote the inflation rate of the stable coin in which the fees are paid or the CPI. The default assumption is
  6. is the lifetime after which a token expires. The default assumption is . The token can be programmed to maintain full potency until it expires, or dwindle in power according to an attenuation function. In traditional finance, the lifetime is often referred to as its maturity, or expiration, meaning the initial length of a contract upon its inception. The tenor is the length of time remaining in the lifetime of a financial contract, .

Fundamental results

The basic results from which all other applications can be derived are summarized in the following theorems, which give the present value of a single REP token when it is minted.

Theorem 1.  (Infinite Life Tokens

where . The reputational salary of a single token is therefore given by the income stream
The present value at time  when a single token is minted in a DAO is

Proof.

Theorem 2. (Constant fees)  

Assume the DAO is in the market position of earning fees with a constant rate  and the lifetime of a token is infinite, .

Then the reputational salary of your single REP token is

and the present value is


Proof.


Theorem 3.  (Finite Life Tokens)

Assume the REP tokens have finite lifetime . Then the total number of active REP tokens at any time is

Then, assuming a single token was minted at time   the fees it earns is given by
(Constant Fees)

Now assume the rate of fees  is constant. At any time  after the DAO reaches token number equilibrium , there will always be  tokens in the system. The income stream of a single token is then

and the present value of 1 token at time  when it is minted is
(Exponential Fees)

Now assume a DAO has exponentially growing fees and lifetime . After the DAO has been running  units of time, the number of active tokens will grow at a proportional exponential rate. The income stream of a single token is then

with present value

Proof.

Consequences

The formulas cannot directly valuate REP tokens in a simple manner. A token's value is dependent on the rate of fees in the DAO after the token is minted. However, the formulas allow us to analyze the value of tokens by observing the past. And further, by making different assumptions about DAO fee rates, averages of present values can be predicted.

Old tokens with infinite lifetime are more valuable then new tokens

For infinite lifetime REP tokens, the present value of a REP token at minting will change depending on the rate of fees the DAO attracts. In this case, more REP accumulates as time goes on. Typically, a REP token minted earlier is more valuable than a REP token minted later, since a later token shares the REP salary with more owners of REP. One way to combat this inequity, if that is desired, is to limit the lifetime of a token.

Convergence to fair value for finite lifetime tokens

Theorem 3 shows that for finite lifetime REP tokens, the number of tokens that exist in the DAO is not important if the rate of fees stabilizes. Assuming the DAO is healthy, in the sense that it attracts a regular rate of fees, that grow with inflation , then the present value of a token minted at equilibrium is which is the same amount of the fees that were brought given to the DAO in order to earn the REP token. Therefore, an expert who earned a REP token does not immediately receive the cash for their work, but they do ultimately receive more than the amount of cash they brought in. The present value of REP tokens (on average) are exactly the same as the amount of fees they attracted with their work. However, the reputation accounted for is also a signal that the owners of REP tokens have done useful work in the past, and their tokens can be slashed at any point up to time .

Applications

Code

See Also

Notes & References

  1. As such, reputation tokenomics can be seen as partially an approach to psephology or political analysis.
  2. Fabian Vogelsteller & Vitalik Buterin, "ERC-20: Token Standard" (2015 November 19) Ethereum Improvement Proposals. Retrieved 2023 April 7.
  3. William Entriken, Dieter Shirley, Jacob Evans & Natassia Sachs, "EIP-721: Non-Fungible Token Standard" (2018) Ethereum Improvement Proposals. Retrieved 2023, April 7.
  4. https://ethereum.org/en/governance/#who-is-involved Retrieved 2023, April 7.