Asking Justice for CRO delegators and Cardano Foundation

Here is CRO’s statement and tweet about the rate hike:

Tried CRO.

Was not impressed.

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 …

  1. We should be warned of such modification maybe with a mail …
  2. It should take place straight awaynbut after a period of time review or something.
  3. 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.

Improvement suggestion to @Cardano-Foundation

  1. 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
  2. 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

1 Like

@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.

6 Likes

Perfect. Thank you for not giving me a hard time.

I am also aware of Binance having a large hold in pools.

When you have a good thing - these things happen.

1 Like

Thanks for such fast reacting!

Problem solved : pool.pm

6 Likes

This is not the case. Parameter change need one more epoch to take place. They are getting nothing out of this move.

5 Likes

BTW, It looks like the Cardano Foundation has already migrated away…

Their pool info:

Click Delegators and the blue box "3 Delegators with stake 15.3M ADA Migrated this epoch elsewhere.

:slight_smile:

1 Like

@adatainment Thanks for that. I indeed thought that param changes are snapshot-ed in the same way as delegator stake.

They are getting nothing out of this move.

Is that really true?

Anyhow, thanks for fixing this so quickly.

2 Likes

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.

It is not true. The damage is being done in the current epoch (264).

I wonder when they bother to correct that description.

@waldmops Can you please be a little more specific about what was or was not true? The question was about whether the increase to 99% was beneficial for the Cro Pool or not. (I am almost sure we mean the same thing)

It’s not uncommon for SPOs to have false statements in their metadata. Look at Bloom ‘highest return on stake’. A lot of people say the same thing.

Yes, that is indeed what I understand to be the question but now I’m not at all certain any more what the right answer is. CF delegated in epoch 262, the predatory fee change happened in epoch 263 and the increased block production due to the delegation can be seen in epoch 264. CF also withdrew their delegation in epoch 264.

Does the fee change kick in in epoch 264 or 265? Where is that documented?

As you can see from the screenshot from tomdx changes kick in in epoch 266. Screenshot looks like coming from cardadanoscan.io - you can check there yourself.

However, they got the blocks for this epoch because of the CF delegation, but with the original parameter configuration. IMO, they’ll get the full rewards in epoch 266, because donation was still there in epoch 264. But it’s only one epoch for them to rip off CF. Bad enough.

Sorry you are wrong with that assumption, by epoch 266 the delegation of Cardano Foundation is gone and in this epoch the new costs and new margin of 99% will take place the first time.

@jf3110 u must understand that they will not receive anything… only the 340 + margin + pledge reward

The big rewards for blocks go to CF as u can see bellow

image

2 Likes

Happy to see that. Sometimes it’s good to be wrong about something. Haven’t looked at the active stake for epoch 266

2 Likes