Well well, so this CRO pool got Cardano Foundation delegation but they right after changed their fees to 3400 ADA and fees to 99%. Basically, broken the criteria for delegation.
Right now I’m asking if there’s some sort of punishment to them because its not a honest thing to do, not to their delegators or CF. This is completely bad and unfair.
I’m attaching the print screens and you can check by yourselves.
@Zyroxa it is going to be accepted, this will open a whole world of opportunities for malicious actors. Why bothering earning fees through years of hard work of securing and marketing the node if one could wipe off ₳180k worth of rewards over 3 months and then start over clean?
Lets not forget that CRO is not only screwing the Foundation, but all of the other 26 delegators too. If delegators don’t notice in time, he is effectively stealing from them as well.
These are some questionable actions indeed. I am curious if and what actions CFO will take. While it is to be expected that certain groups seek to play the system at projects of Cardano’s scale, it doesn’t make it less sad.
This is exactly what happens when the pledge requirement for CF delegation is so low. Giving 15 mil stake to a pool with only 33k pledge isn’t wise. A ton of the eligible pools are run by the same person/people trying to accumulate free stake.
I’m fairly new - what figure on your link should pop out to me the most ? Thank you, this will provide me a starting point to read these pool charts better.
What should I “not forget” and how exactly are they “screwing” - and how can I tell that at a glance looking at ADA pool link?
I see the 99% margin. 28 Delegators. Pledge leverage 484.
What should be so obvious that a new person would be ridiculed for not understanding it - - - So I know how to approach others about this topic - if THEY bring it up.
This is unacceptable, how is the fixed cost even moved to 3400 … i have the same issue on another pool. The fixed cost went from 340 to 840 … I thought that couldn’t be moved
Well the thing here and must be fixed from cardano, if youn delegate to a norma and fair pool.They couldnchange those fees withour you knowing i
mean i’m not looking my daedalus wallet every day …
We should be warned of such modification maybe with a mail …
It should take place straight awaynbut after a period of time review or something.
It should be limited because above 10% margin it’s just a scam lool
same goes to fixed cost
This was bound to happen because the incentives are wrong. Delegating so much money to pools with very little pledge encourages people to set up an otherwise unsustainable pool.
It is like a lottery ticket that costs nothing while having very high chance of winning, something in the 1:100 order of magnitude. Giving out such tickets is unwise.
Raise the minimum pledge in order to encourage cooperation between SPOs. One pool with a million pledge is better for the network than twenty with only 50’000
Award delegated amount disproportionally based on pledge
For example
Pledge <100’000 - not eligible
Pledge 100’000 - delegate 200’000
Pledge 200’000 - delegate 400’000
Pledge 300’000 - delegate 900’000
…
Pledge 1’000’000 - delegate 10’000’000
@True2me4you CRO received a sponsorship from the Cardano Foundation (CF) that is supposed to help small pools - in this case CRO received 15m for three months. In a way this is an endorsement from the CF that this pool is valuable to the network, community and delegators.
However, the minute they received the sponsorship, they changed the pool margin to from 2% to 99% and fixed cost from 340 to 3400 ADA.
This effectively redirect all rewards to the pool operator. So, they not only steal from the CF but also from all delegators that trusted them. Clearly, they must have expected that the CF will notice and re-delegate a.s.a.p. By that time however they will have received 15 x 750 => 11250 ADA which is clearly a criminal offense.
This incident is a game changer that indirectly hurts every pool operator. I guess, we’ll see how it’ll play out.
Yes it is.In the screenshot, you can see that the margin and cost parameters haven’t changed yet. And by the time they change, the delegation is already out of snapshot.
