Interesting idea…it seems it is more focused on burning esGMX than it is on providing long term liquidity (for what ends exactly? esGMX liquidity? It constricts the supply and makes liquidity stagnant; if for the ends of GMX liquidity…I’m not sure there’s any long term issue with it)
I implore OP and @z-dev to check out a portion of a proposal made labeled OMPB4 “Off-Shore Mining”
“Give the options to users to select a 25% or 50% shorter vesting period at a 25% or 50% tax of their esGMX; esGMX which has been taxed due to expedited vesting will be held accumulated from Jan 01 FY to Dec 31 FY and withheld from circulation or “shored up”; on Jan 01 of the following Fiscal Year, the esGMX collected the year prior will be distributed to staked GMX as esGMX. The FPF is currently an inefficient use of capital and will not even reach a $2 backing of GMX within a meaningful timeframe. By constantly off-setting esGMX for a year, buy pressure from expedited vestning is mitigated in the long term, and allows longer term holders to mine the taxed-offset esGMX.”
X and others have commented on increasing the tax penalty so it makes more sense as a game-theoretic binary decision: vest normally, or discount your vest (at a tax on your esGMX)