I’m generally supportive of this move.
The shift from a linear decay model to a power-law APY curve is a meaningful upgrade, not because it simply raises yield, but because it aligns rewards with conviction and market reality.
A few things stand out to me:
-
Cycle awareness:
- High APY when stakeweight is low is exactly when incentives should be strongest. This encourages holders to stake during uncertainty rather than only after momentum returns.
-
Better long-term alignment
- The faster decay at higher stakeweights discourages short-term farming while still keeping long-run emissions in check. That’s a healthier incentive structure.
-
Sustainability intact
- This doesn’t inflate the overall reward schedule. It redistributes incentives across time, which is the right lever to pull.
One addition I’d strongly like to see:
Introducing veNFT-style staking positions that are transferable and mergeable.
Being able to buy other stakers’ positions and merge durations to extend lockups adds critical flexibility:
-
Long-term aligned participants can compound conviction
-
New entrants get a way in
-
Existing stakers get a way out without destabilizing the system
That optional liquidity tends to increase participation, not reduce it, and in my view would materially strengthen $WCT value over time.
Finally, clear frontend visualization and education will be important. Power-law curves and duration-based incentives aren’t intuitive, and the benefits need to be obvious to users.
Overall, this feels like a well-reasoned evolution of the staking model and a strong complement to the P3 redesign. 
Looking forward to continued community discussion.
long-term stakers
