Announcing the stake pools chosen for April 2022

Contratulations to all the winners for this round!

GRC1 Pool

1 Like

Congratulations to everyone who won the selection for CF delegation! I hope this is helpful for you and you will do great things with it! :partying_face:


Congratz to the selected.

I made the honarable mention, meaning I applied hooray :).

Congratulations and best of luck to all pools selected :sunglasses:

Cool to see EQUTY as an honorable mention - thank you CF :raised_hands:

1 Like

4 posts were split to a new topic: The pool ticker “ADA” is part of a pool cluster

IOG did exactly this in their last delegation announcement.

What is the name or ticker of your pool?

Congratulations to all pools selected! Could anyone please tell me where one can apply for the next round?

Thank you in advance;)

A post was merged into an existing topic: The pool ticker “ADA” is part of a pool cluster

Congratulations to all pools selected!
and thanks a lot for onorable mention of STPZ1 pool!

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: The pool ticker “ADA” is part of a pool cluster

I’m sure this post will probably be hidden, but here is another multi-pool that CF has been delegating to for their last 3 rounds - ZW3RK. Go to their website which shares a webpage with one of their other pools.

Your posts are not hidden. They are very much visible at the link directly above your latest post.

As @adatainment already said:

Adapools considers them single pool operator:


Nobody can comment there. It was removed from conversation. As if too embarrassed to let people agree with what’s said.

This is single pool by omission. They haven’t reach out out to @danny_cryptofay to have themselves labeled as a group. Why would they when they can continue getting CF delegation?

Continually falling back on that weird loophole is adolescent. I’ve showed that your mythology is fatally flawed and is continually being gamed. To just shrug about it is sad…

Do something about it

What are you guys even defending? Are you defending what is right?

These people know they are running more than one pool, but are willing to lie on applications because they will probably get paid for it. Instead of looking at it objectively, you are defending and promoting this behavior.

I’ve pointed it out, I’ve provided proof. It’s not ok that you guys are advocating it and even preferring it. This is wrong.

That thread deteriorated into bickering between two users. That was a good reason to close it, in my opinion.

Do you really consider this example as one of the reasons multi-pools should be excluded? The second one has a totally different concept (100% margin for more or less charity), has whooping 5076 ADA stake and did not produce any blocks ever. Isn’t it just stickling to the rules as self purpose to want them excluded?

I’m not CF, not nearly. I just can very much understand that they do not want and do not have the resources to do an investigation into hundreds of pools.

I’d see two possibilities:

  1. Remove the single pool requirement. It’s obviously not assessable objectively and continously leads to fruitless discussions.
  2. Work out a better definition for multi-pools and a methodology that cannot be so easily gamed. Waiting for someone to cry havoc in the forum and then swiftly taking away their delegation again at will is not a methodology.

The person that stood to lose from the conversation was able to derail and hijack the thread and have it hidden. Their conversation had little to do with the OP. That’s why it’s so suspicious to have my other comments also moved to that locked thread instead of pruning their conversation out.

They could easily prefer pools with pledge over pools without it. Pledge is THE system in place to eliminate pool splitting. When they announce that they PREFER ‘small’ pools, guess what, suddenly we have 1500+ small pools trying to get their delegation.

I’d hardly call a post with proof crying havoc. They should accept and positively respond to community members that are willing to put in the work to find pools gaming the system. Instead they point to a loophole and remove my comment from conversation. The proper response would be, 'Huh, thanks for pointing that obvious multi pool out that for some reason is considered a single pool."

ZW3RK doesn’t even hide that fact that they run many pools. It’s as simple as going to their website where they list another one of their pools. They have lied on their CF delegation application many times.

This behavior should not be rewarded.


@Tom_Stafford you are a defender of decentralization and may well be THE Defender of Decentralization. I commend your determination and dedication to helping pools…

The two grave threats to decentralisation that you found – ADA and ZW3RK – both have 25k pledge. So, you want to have a higher pledge requirement? How high? Or would it then be okay again if they get it? And you want to exclude pools that cannot afford that from CF delegation?

“Many” as in “two, one of which very much looks like a failed experiment that never picked up any pace”?