Proposal: Burn Unclaimed 2/3 Vested SUSHI Rewards

As much as I don’t like the idea of projects potentially claiming their SUSHI and selling it immediately on the open market, I agree with @BoringCrypto here. Instead of taking a defensive tact and blocking these projects from claiming their SUSHI, we should be focused on creating value for the token and ecosystem that incentivizes these projects to hold their SUSHI much like Tesla holding BTC to their treasury. Reputation is everything, and given all of the drama we have gotten past in the last few months, I think it wise to do whatever we can to be good crypto citizens.

Yes, these projects could potentially dump their SUSHI, and the short-term impact on price would not be ideal (I for one would LOVE the opportunity to load up on more SUSHI at a discount). However, as anyone who has been in the crypto space long enough knows, once these projects capitulate and sell, that sets us up for a much stronger recovery and upward trajectory. If they want to sell, let them sell. They’re obviously not believers and this just distributes the tokens to people who are believers and support the future of SUSHI.


Just let it be! Most likely unclaimed SUSHIs will be from smaller holders

Let’s do it. sushi is affected by uncertainty.

Just start here- if i claim my 1 suhi today i pay 44$ Fee -so i will not claim for a long time and do not understand what this discussion is good for

It does seem like a really bad idea not to disperse the funds. If they follow an unlock period similar to how Synthetix’s escrows work, it shouldn’t have to large of an impact on price. It will damage Sushi’s reputation to just not hold up to its promise on rewards.

No Sushi should be withheld from anyone. I echo the sentiments of trente, belmore, BoringCrypto, and Uliner.

  1. Withholding rewards to anyone was never stated in an official capacity.

  2. When this was brought up in the SIMP#3 forum thread there was strong opposition to the idea.

  3. The SIMP#3 Snapshot with option 2 (which won): “Similar approach to Balancer’s claims - use a smart contract that would allow claiming every week. This would cost us almost nothing, but the receivers would have to bear much higher gas costs, possibly preventing smaller farmers from claiming their Sushi.”

I understand the desire to prevent Sushi from going to stale/broken contracts but we should not use that as the reason for not paying out to all smart contracts. Members/participants of smart contracts that are stale/broken need to come forward and self-advocate.

As for the concern for people selling Sushi…if people want to sell they will sell. By withholding coins from farmers we’ll just be delaying the price impact. Let the free markets run their course.


Totally agree with @BoringCrypto . We shouldn’t “breach of contract.” It should be claimable indefinitely.

If it’s don’t claimed, it’s equal to burned

Yes excellent, excellent. Question. Where do we go to claim these SUSHI Rewards?

1 Like

More information will follow soon before the end date of the six months. Will be in the form of a merkle drop with a simple claim button on the main Sushi UI.
I want to get SUSHI to all that directly or indirectly staked. All logic is already in place for those that staked directly.

uncertainties are always bad. Prizes should be distributed as soon as possible.

I want everyone to know I am not against unlocking any and all sushi. I originally made this proposal to help with exposure of this topic, and help further discussion about this. As it currently stands, ANY protocol that farmed sushi can submit a proposal and get their 2/3 vested sushi as long as the COMMUNITY votes yes through a snapshot.

Please check the Pickle proposal as an example: Vested SUSHI Rewards for Pickle Finance

Right now (afaik) the vesting is only going to direct wallets, and not contracts. Submitting a proposal is free, and snapshot voting is also free. If a protocol submits a proposal that says “give us our sushi because it’s ours” and the token holders vote yes, then they will get it. If the token holders vote no, they will be required to re-submit a proposal that forms a better partnership with the sushi holders and ecosystem.

This CAN be a way for smaller farms to not just dump tokens, but create a synergistic partnership where both sushi and these protocols can grow together in harmony. Please do not misconstrue my proposal.

1 Like

This feels like changing the rules after people have already agreed to things. Another teaching moment for any farm who has partnered with SushiSwap - that anything not locked into code can and will be changed without respect.

I personally picked up SFI-ETH LP tokens when the LP was on the Onsen menu and it didn’t pay out any rewards – When I asked why I wasn’t getting any rewards after a few days of being staked in the pool on SushiSwap, JiroOno told me that I needed to join and stake my LP tokens at Saffron to get the SUSHI rewards (even though the rewards were displayed in Onsen) for the LP. So I’ve been staking my LPs on Saffron that for MONTHS now. Only to see this proposal appear saying whether or not we’ll see our vested rewards is left to the whim of the community.

I spoke with the Psykeeper the founder of Saffron regarding vested Sushi reward payouts a few weeks ago and he thought the vested rewards would be distributed the same way they’re doing rewards now and was seemingly unaware of this proposal, as was I, until reading about it in the discord tonight.

This is a terrible idea for those of us who’ve staked on “partner” platforms. Seeing this proposal defended as something other than a breach of good faith understanding of how SushiSwap rewards work and saying “it’s up to the community” is a poor excuse when the community votes are decided by a couple of wallets with millions of SUSHI.

I have read a claim defending this proposal that this is to protect individual LP holders or punish protocols that aren’t going to fairly pay out to the LP holders that staked on 3rd party protocols. Why is that any business of SushiSwap?

Currently SushiSwap is paying out normal 1/3 rewards to those protocols (and presumably to their staked LP holders) – so why change the rules for 2/3 vested SUSHI? What’s the different if the protocol gets it and distributes it (or doesn’t) and if individuals get the 2/3 directly. It’s not like staking on another protocol makes extra SUSHI that wouldn’t have been earned anyway.


I just wanted to say that I’m planning on having open discussion about this topic(hopefully with the participation of team members no promises) on the sushi forum today(Monday,9pm UTC in the Sushiswap discord). Hope to see you guys there :slight_smile:

edit: Rescheduled to Thursday 9pm UTC; should be a less busy day for most people, thank guys!


What or whom are the determining factors that decide whether or not a protocol is approved to claim vested SUSHI?

There are partner projects that distributed SUSHI earned for Onsen Pools directly alongside their own reward tokens. I have no doubt that they will distribute the vested part to users directly as well.
The intention is always that Sushi earned by staking will end up with the users that staked.

1 Like

How do you get added to the discord server?

1 Like

here’s a permanent invite link

Sushi unlocks linearly.

I have a small bag.

I don’t want to stress out that I miss something.

I prefer for time to pass so I could unlock a bigger chunk.

For me the threat of burning is a big NO NO

1 Like

No worries, there is no burn on your vested sushi. The sushi is unlocking linearly and you can wait to claim so that you’re not being inefficient with your gas. quote from pinned message posted by Omakase in the discord server

  • Amounts will be unlocked once a week for the next 27 weeks, you do not need to claim each week since amounts from previous weeks will accumulate