How ? So they are staking to pools withnout having ro which other major chains are doing this your something else
Do as you guys need it is much appreciated helping smaller pools within the regulatory frame you are in.
Thank you!!
1 Like
I second @glagolef in requiring a reasonable amount of pledge or at least existing stake for a pool to receive a delegation from CF. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to subsidize “pools” that only have very little or even zero stake as it would create wrong incentives.
For the same reason I would frown at the CF delegating to pools that take a variable fee (margin) in addition to the fixed cost.
The goal should be to strengthen healthy pools and not keep alive pools that would otherwise be too small to operate sustainably.
So, maybe select pools with between 2% and 10% saturation that charge 0% variable cost and delegate enough to bump their saturation by a few %.
5m / pool and monthly
1 Like
Honestly I don’t look at this this way.
I think that giving to all SPOs the chance to sign blocks with their pool is necessary. It helps to evaluate the ecosystem, and the SPO itself. Then only who will be able to operate well, will be able to make the difference in terms of performances and stats. On the long run only good hard working SPOs will survive… and not only the famous ones.
1 Like
I really appreciate delegation program of CF and further steps to support more independent pools. Because high stake attracts other delegates, it would be helpful, if the delegation of CF would remain for a month, so pools with (so far) low stake are able to mint blocks constantly, pay and show rewards and can do some useful marketing with it to attract new delegates…
1 Like
I’d like to see 10M with longer term support for pools - like 3 month delegations. This allows the operators you select to really firmly establish themselves, optimize their setup for the long haul, and hopefully attract enough stake to really make a business of it.
10M is enough to get over the 340Ada/epoch kiss of death for smaller pool ROI and 3Months is enough time for delegation to slowly work its way to these pools. if you can get this first set delegated before the K change that would be best.
Finally, it would be great if you could coordinate with IOHK as to not overlap. Likely easier said than done.
11 Likes
Thanks for the survey! 
I’m not quite sure if I missed it: How is the delegation strategy regarding pool groups? Will CF still delegate to single pools?
for the first question 6 million would be fine.
Thanks
Fine for me with 15 million and once a month.
100% agree to what @gufmar said !
In addition, few criterias that are quite important to drive education and prevent some malpractices:
- Disqualification of pool-splitters without high pledge aka leverage factor highlighted in IOG blogs - as the goal is to drive decentralisation.
- SPOaaS and PaaS providers, it’s not healthy for ecosystem , neither for security nor for this becoming a common practice.
8 Likes
What if it would be good is for the cardano foundation to leave the rewards obtained for delegating in the pool
I think 7.5M is too low.
85 delegations per month is quite an undertaking even if CF only selects a new delegation on a monthly (5-6 epoch) basis. Especially if they move funds to hardware wallets. 85x5/6epochs would also mean over 12 months that at least 1024 individual pools could be selected for delegation over a year, which I think is quite higher than required since many pools are outside of the criteria for selection already.
- 26 pools are currently over 2M in pledge.
- 170 pools appear to be 5% or over in margin
- 148 pools are 345 ADA fee or higher
- 360 over the 5% saturation at k=500 (including 93 over 64M saturation)
- 517 pools with 0 blocks minted
So that’s 1221 pools, out of 1217 total on pooltool. So obviously there is overlap.
Guessing maybe a 40% overlap in exclusion that takes 1221 pools down by 488, leaving 732 pools who would be excluded, before any pool closures, new pools, exceeding saturation etc… That leaves only 484 pools which today are eligible for CF delegation, without even looking at solo pool operators as a factor. So 1024 pools per year seems way more than needed. At 15M (slightly less than 23% saturation at k=500) with 6 epoch delegation changes we would still achieve CF delegating to 512 pools per year if they do not redelegate to a previous pool.
I’d like to see CF avoid ANY redelegation to a pool already selected for at least 36 epochs. A 4 round exclusion after being selected once seems myopic in retrospect unless there were no other pools which fit the criteria. Factors such as being a cardano ambassador or influencer (on youtube, twitter, etc.) obviously should not be taken into consideration at all in the selection process, which CF listed it was random, but if outside humans are selecting the “random” pool, then nothing is really random.
Given the above, I think 15M would be an interesting sweet spot. It makes the delegation around about 23% w/ k=500, less than 46% of saturation once k=1000. I think the 15M is a spot that CF could leave over the next 2 k param changes. Once the total pools which fit their current criteria dwindle such that excluding them for 36 epochs is not possible, the rounds for exclusion could change, or the criteria in general could be updated for selection.
2 Likes
A pool with 2-10% (with the current cap already at 2%) would produce blocks nearly every epoch already. Charging a 0% margin means they don’t pay themselves for the work they do, and won’t make anything from the delegation, besides blocks.
Supporting pools already minting basically every epoch and also not paying themselves by running a 0% margin sounds like a drastic change from the selection criteria. This definitely does not sound like helping the majority of small pool operators.
Honestly the only way out of exchanges/big entities owning any DPOS network is to make the saturation ridiculously low, and the technical know-how to run one, basically nothing… Make it so low that it’s not financially worth it for big companies to even bother.
Daedalus should be able to self-stake with a single click of a button. Saturation should be 100k and adjusted even lower as ADA value increases.
THE MASSES NEED TO RUN THE NETWORK… Or Cardano will be nothing more than another Chase Bank/Goldman Sachs. Devs need to find a way to put the power of the network in the hands of the people, not Binance pools or 1PCT pools. Delegating is not providing the right incentives for decentralization. I’m sorry, but it’s not.
You conveniently forget to mention the fixed fee per epoch which is supposed to pay for the cost the pool has. Most of that is already covered by the delegators unless the pool owner contributes most of the stake themselves.
No part of the pool operating cost depends on the amount staked, so why take a margin?
Besides, the purpose of a stake pool is to, well, pool stake. Just running a node with no or miniscule stake in the hope that enough people would come and pay a cut of their rewards does not make a stake pool.
10 million is enough to sign blocks an less time 1 month. And distribute in more pools
I don’t think it should be a fixed amount but variable and the necessary to make a pool produce +1 block per epoch and rotate once a month.
Making the delegation amount variable would enable a better distribution, and while not being the same for every pool, impact on the other hand should be the same.
Hope I made myself understand.
1 Like
We recently asked our community to vote on core aspects of the Cardano Foundation’s delegation methodology. In the discussion that has followed here, some participants have expressed an interest in a longer Cardano Foundation redelegation period, spanning months rather than a few epochs or weeks.
To reflect the interests of those who expressed a desire for longer redelegation periods, we would like to call for one final round of votes to reflect this. Your responses will help us decide our redelegation methodology, and we are grateful for your participation. Thank you to all who have voted so far.
3. In your opinion, what should be the right epoch interval for redelegation?
- Once a month
- Every two months
- Every three months
0 voters
2 Likes
Need all translate in german