[adapools.org] Where to delegate?

A bit smarter toplist of pool candidates for new delegations /for newbies which dont know :slight_smile:


Did you mean: “smarter” = biassed?

Would have saved me a lot of searching / comparing if you had posted this a couple of hours earlier… :smile:

1 Like

no. you mean “If my fav pool is not here, it must be biassed”?

so in future you can check it =))

Will do, if I ever have to re-delegate again… My current pool is far from saturated though, so if they keep up performance I’ll be fine

1 Like

No, I meant if some high perform pools are not there in the 50 which have better perf then a lot in there, then it should be biassed.

All registered pools are not listed by default just for a reason they exist. There is a kind of investor protection implemented on the page. Certain conditions must be met to display a pool. For example, live stake > 70% AND < 140% than average stake in last 13 days. The algorithm including all conditions is described at the bottom of the page. In our view, the delegation is quite safe if all conditions are met.

For. ex. if pool with 1M stake had 30% ROA, now have 10M, is pure fact, he doesnt have 30% ROA in future too.

C’mon Pal. I respect your background and the great work you do in the community. But don’t be unnecessarily critical, and don’t discredit the tool in this way. Try to substantiate your opinions with arguments.

The proposal is interesting, it is covering an aspect that others do not cover, and it is also documented.

1 Like

Do not get me wrong, I should be oppositely biassed (as my pool is in the list), so I think my moral incentives are stronger than the economical ones.

I have no doubt, that you did it for a common good, but are you aware of that it can highly affect pools (even they perform better or worse), and that the pools are incentivised for cheating/laying (due to the height and slot battles and some others incentives) in the ITN (so, combine both)?

My critic is that, you cannot do this (morally) cos it’s like a god power if it does not thought through very carefully (would say by some very strict indisciplined sciences). Even, it’s wrong in Daedalus for some reasons. As one example that the past behaviours of individuals do not predict the future ones (well know fact by by forensic psychologists that they’re only ~40% accurate, meaning they are more often wrong than right). And, I think the root of this is some design flaw in the reward system, and these issues are treated like what common doctors due, try to cure symptoms instead of eliminating the root cause of the disease, which is hardly work for short term, and not at all for long.

Also, I did not want to answer as you’re (based on your reply) probably biassed (of course, cos you made it, it’s your child and any critic or opposite opinion is uncomfortable i.e. a kind of threat. And that’s ok, and it’s independent to the intellectual capabilities, heeeeey emotion…), a prober argument needs rational/objective thinking without any biasses, fallacies and incentives. So, I will stop here for now, and just say: have a great day.

1 Like

I think it’s a projection based on information from the past. And most of us understand it that way, I think. It’s not about guaranteeing future behavior, but about showing a raking of past behavior as a prelude to what could be a future in perspective. Because otherwise, under your logic that I well understand and share, we should mark all the ordered lists in tools and wallets, as biased lists.

I think that understanding what all the lists are about, and making the pertinent explanation, serves as a guide or reference.

1 Like