# Latin America and Spain should also be part of the consensus **URL:** \ **Category:** Operate a Stake Pool\ **Created:** [30 October 2020 15:29 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735 "2020-10-30T15:29:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rodri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/rodri/32/24024_2.png) [@rodri](https://forum.cardano.org/u/rodri)\ **Post date:** [30 October 2020 15:29 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/1 "2020-10-30T15:29:28Z")
* * * Although I am quite active in the forum, I try not to express myself publicly, and let the community express itself based on its collective wisdom. But at this moment, as an ambassador dedicated to the hispanic community, and as an SPO with almost a year of experience, I need to make a simple petition to the main actors of the ecosystem, about a problem that has been worsening for many months, and with no solution in sight. Since the beginning of ITN, we created a very active community of more than 100 SPOs. Many people dedicating hours learning, and giving support. Since my role has to do with the adoption and expansion of the community, I focused with others on encouraging participation. Unconvinced people were joining in this adventure of being an SPO. But Shelley arrived, and with it, some problems. From the first day the Daedalus ranking did not contribute anything to the decentralization, we were forced to define a minimum high fixed fee, and the ADApools ranking used this weakness (with the concept of “cost”) that took away the little protagonist we could have. In turn, this was deepened with the incorporation of the ADApools ranking into Yoroi, which although EMURGO’s idea was to include other options, in practice time is pressing and the hispanic pools lost a lot of traction against other pools that were capturing more market. Today, Yoroi still has only one ranking, by ADApools. With this I am not trying to point fingers, but to describe a reality. But if this were not enough, a few days ago IOG launched a functionality in Daedalus where it sent almost all the hispanic pools (except one) into exile (literally). The hispanic community has shown a great strength and resilience, by continuing to support despite the continuous obstacles imposed by different influential actors of this ecosystem. For my part, as an ambassador I have decided to retire as an SPO, not only because of indignation, but also so as not to compete against Hispanic SPOs and focus entirely on supporting them. Many are not lucky enough to reach the global community, and our “work” as SPO is not about being excellent communicators or influencers, but technicians capable of building a solid infrastructure around the node, being very aware of the difficulties of being an SPO, and with the necessary hardware to support the processing volume that will come with Goguen. The reality is that there is an abysmal difference of stake between Hispanic pools and the rest, when the difference in operation capacity and solidity of the infrastructure is not so different (I would dare to say that there is no difference). Currently, Hispanic SPOs with great skills only receive a handful of stakes from delegates who are aware of the centralization problem that exists. From my point of view, Cardano cannot be proud to call himself the most decentralized network in the crypto industry when a community as vast as the hispanic one (Latin America + Spain), has very little participation in the creation of blocks: > Of the total number of blocks created by the community, **~0.16%** were created by hispanic pools. My petition is if you, as influential actors of the ecosystem, can take into account the different realities when making your decisions (or at least not making THESE decisions), and if IOG can avoid imposing on the only official full node wallet that the delegates have to vote for their choice, which pools to show and which not. Decentralization begins at the wallet. Daedalus currently dictates which pools are shown “on” and which are “off”. Let’s try to be broad when proposing “solutions”, and avoid imposing conditions according to a personal vision (or convenience). The concept of decentralization implies NO imposition of conditions (except those dictated by protocol), and fair play by influential actors. > So, in conclusion I ask you, from my humble position, **not to help us, but not to hinder us either**. You have been systematically harming the hispanic community with incomprehensible decisions, and this is not the first time I have mentioned it. Please let us apply decentralization as a philosophy of life and a vision of development, not just as a slogan. And don’t put obstacles and discourage those who try daily to take Cardano to Latin America and Spain. **Please** 🙏 Thank you 👌 @IOHK_Tim @SebastienGllmt @yosef * * * _Disclaimer: This is a personal opinion where the Cardano Foundation and my role as ambassador have no relation._ ---
**Author:** ![COSDpool](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cosdpool/32/21482_2.png) [@COSDpool](https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool)\ **Post date:** [30 October 2020 16:11 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/2 "2020-10-30T16:11:52Z")
thanks @rodri - it’s requirements like this, as well as the stake centralisation problem in general, that I had in mind when drafting the current Cardano Improvement Proposal for user-generated stake allocation portfolios: > [@CIP: Stake URI scheme for pools & delegation portfolios](https://forum.cardano.org/t/cip-stake-uri-scheme-for-pools-delegation-portfolios/40594): > > Below is a draft Cardano Improvement Proposal (CIP) for stake pool & staking portfolio URIs. A robust forum discussion is a required step of submitting this plan as a CIP. I’m open to changes & suggestions before submitting the first draft of that CIP, and will include any corrections & consensus from the community as time goes on. I’ll include the Github CIP link in a further comment as soon as it’s produced. Discussion is vital to keep this CIP moving forward so the necessary application s… > … with these benefits for each part of the Cardano staking ecosystem: > > - **communities of pools** : i.e. special interest, self-organising, union-formed, or democratically established peer groups, with any of these criteria and more: > - … _community-based_ (geographical, technological, or other affiliation) Many other geographical / ethnic / philosophical / technical interests remain fragmented with low stake in their representative pools, and there is enough Ada stake for them all to be competitive without having to combine their pools (a half measure that would work _against_ decentralisation). IOG and Emurgo could assign a much greater priority to multi-pool wallet delegation, as well as this CIP itself which has had very little official recognition and support so far. Perhaps if more people posted comments supporting that CIP then its priority would be escalated. A usable Community Portfolio of the 100 pools that you have already curated would go a long way towards fixing the problem you have pointed out, since sympathetic users could delegate to that pool list directly. As documented already in the Github discussion, the proposed Stake Pool URI Scheme would be able to support twice that number of pools. With proper support for crowdsourced delegation portfolios, I’d like to think that their total percentage of block production would line up more with their percentage of total pools, as we all proceed toward a generally more even distribution of stake. 🕶 ---
**Author:** ![CubanLeo](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cubanleo/32/52815_2.png) [@CubanLeo](https://forum.cardano.org/u/CubanLeo)\ **Post date:** [30 October 2020 16:51 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/3 "2020-10-30T16:51:24Z")
Rodri. Spanish community should be proud of having an Ambassador like you. You have the knowledge and the necessary skills for representing us, and you are a humble person wich opinios are quiet often fair and right. Maybe not today, but with your help at some point spanish community will grow enough and you will return as a SPO. ---
**Author:** ![GenkiPool](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/genkipool/32/23231_2.png) [@GenkiPool](https://forum.cardano.org/u/GenkiPool)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 03:32 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/4 "2020-10-31T03:32:17Z")
Hello, I am the SPO of GenkiPool, I started GenkiPool at the beginning of the Shelley era in time 208. I joined Cardano for its technology and its philosophy, I have been informing myself about Cardano since 2018 and one of the things that it boasts the most is due to its desire to achieve the largest decentralized network in the crypto world, however, since the beginning of the Shelley era I only see measures that increasingly support centralization, such as not taking any measure that prevents the same person or company create more than one or two pools. From the beginning, Daedalus showed a random raking and with the passage of time the ranking turned in favor of pools with a higher stake, even saturated pools appearing in the first places, thus fostering more and more a centrality network, so much so that Today 54.7% of the distributed stake is dominated by 12 pools. Despite everything, the SPOs have continued to support the Cardano project and do our best to manage our pools, thinking that in the future measures would be taken to support the decentralized network that they promise so much, however, a few days ago IOG launched a new one. Daedalus update that far from improving the ranking to favor a decentralized network further encourages the choice of pools that have a higher stake, since not only the pools with the highest stake always appear in the first place regardless of the amount selected with the slider option, but small pools about 800/1146 appear in a gray color and without a ranking number, which seem to have been withdrawn or are out of operation, so much so, that I had to notify my delegates to not to think that GenkiPool had retired. We are many SPOs that support the Cardano project and this functionality makes us feel excluded, therefore, **we would like at least an explanation of what the objective of this functionality is, which does not favor at all to achieve a decentralized network and that It will be explained to us why we are going to do marketing of Cardano to help its adoption if Daedalus is already going to decide which pool is the “best” according to them.** I hope that these inconveniences that create great discontent in the community are explained and solved, the Cardano community would not like to see how Cardano is one of many that promise a decentralized network of words and then see that it does not even make the minimum effort to be achieved, which is to help the SPOs that support the network. Thank you so much for your attention. Greetings Genki. ---
**Author:** ![tsnnst](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/tsnnst/32/16241_2.png) [@tsnnst](https://forum.cardano.org/u/tsnnst)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 05:20 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/6 "2020-10-31T05:20:59Z")
We should have more rankings in Daedalus, with other characteristics. Yes the ranking does not promote decentralization. ---
**Author:** ![hanswurst](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/hanswurst/32/21722_2.png) [@hanswurst](https://forum.cardano.org/u/hanswurst)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 10:29 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/7 "2020-10-31T10:29:19Z")
> [@caribepool](#): > > And of course, as it mentioned, the new ranking from Daedalus is like the last nail in the coffin for decentralization. [Adapools.org](http://Adapools.org), which is present on the Yoroi wallet provides a ranking that is also misleading delegates in some kind of way. I second that. ---
**Author:** ![CardanoCastellano](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cardanocastellano/32/12309_2.png) [@CardanoCastellano](https://forum.cardano.org/u/CardanoCastellano)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 14:45 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/8 "2020-10-31T14:45:03Z")
Thanks for sharing this Rodri, although it is sad to read it. You are kind of a “robot” ambassador who is everywhere, all the time, translating, answering community members’ doubts with high degree of technical details, sharing a lot of knowledge, since a long time ago. If this is your situation, what should we expect for the rest of the SPOs? As per @CODSpool message, it seems to be an even broader issue affecting not only hispanic pools but also pools from other communities. Hope for your voice to be listened and for a solution to be provided. ---
**Author:** ![pochocosta](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/pochocosta/32/23242_2.png) [@pochocosta](https://forum.cardano.org/u/pochocosta)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 17:04 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/9 "2020-10-31T17:04:29Z")
Thanks Rodrigo by exposing your opinion. If Cardano can make some changes we will celebrate them. But if not happens, As Latin American I think we need to join forces and empower SPO one by one. It depends only in us. What do you think about? ---
**Author:** ![COSDpool](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cosdpool/32/21482_2.png) [@COSDpool](https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 17:32 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/10 "2020-10-31T17:32:54Z")
> [@CardanoCastellano](#): > > As per @CODSpool message, it seems to be an even broader issue affecting not only hispanic pools but also pools from other communities. > > Hope for your voice to be listened and for a solution to be provided. dear @CardanoCastellano, if you think the Stake Pool URIs would help, then please comment at the above thread for that CIP and tell all your “brothers in arms” to do the same. 🙂 It’s astonishing how long this proposal has been “in the works” without a single supportive comment or analysis from any other SPO… especially the ones who have complained most bitterly about stake centralisation. Since SPOs (Hispanic or otherwise) aren’t insisting on this feature, they’re not getting it… the proposal for user-created delegation portfolios remains on “wish list” until further notice. Unfortunately, until we have documented popular demand for this feature, we’ll be expecting that notice to come from the Cardano development agencies who appear to benefit most from the stake centralisation. A stake pool link protocol was proposed 2½ years ago and remains unimplemented… which means at the rate we’re going now, finally with official acknowledgement but little else, we might not expect community driven delegation until Cardano / ADA sinks or swims without it. Now that the recent (`2.4.0`) Daedalus ranking adjustments are reported to have a stake _aggregating_ rather than decentralising effect, a means of identifying pool collectives in support of user centric communities (Hispanic and many more) is the next most viable option. As I’ve written in the proposal itself, work can continue on this while everyone goes on bickering about the protocol parameters and ranking algorithms. And about **all** issues above: we have been told outright that the escalation point for SPO complaints is _through the **IOG Marketing** team_. I’ll bet we would see some _real_ progress if the forum contributors above, if not every one of Cardano’s 100 Hispanic SPOs, would directly contact the IOG Marketing representatives listed in this concluding comment, and present their demands for community stake pool links _and_ a fairer system of pool ranking… 🕶 > [@CSPA & SPO fight for true decentralization](https://forum.cardano.org/t/cspa-spo-fight-for-true-decentralization/41182/20): > > Anyway if this discussion itself was being called “armchair quarterbacking” then here’s the result of all that work “from the sidelines” (though it’s @Colin_Edwards who deserves all the credit): Confirming the goal of IOG going from 20 public pools down to 1… along with the revelation that this was hoped for in August, meaning that restructuring might now be considered overdue Confirming portions of that freed delegation from IOG will go to small & community pools Determination of personal co… ---
**Author:** ![rodri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/rodri/32/24024_2.png) [@rodri](https://forum.cardano.org/u/rodri)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 19:33 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/11 "2020-10-31T19:33:40Z")
Join forces without losing decentralization. That is, empowering them in positioning to be visible to the global community, without each operator losing its autonomy. It does not depend on a single person, but on a group of people who join forces towards this common goal. Count on me. I will make my contribution from CAZ. ---
**Author:** ![CardanoCastellano](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cardanocastellano/32/12309_2.png) [@CardanoCastellano](https://forum.cardano.org/u/CardanoCastellano)\ **Post date:** [31 October 2020 22:30 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/12 "2020-10-31T22:30:46Z")
Thanks @COSDpool I took a look at your CIP, but sorry, I’m not a tech guy, so it is quite difficult for me to give any kind of opinion. @Rodri, thoughts on this? I was about to recommend you the Catalyst project and then I saw a comment from Sebastien stating that you already have something there, I made a search at Ideascale with “URI scheme” but I was not able to find you. > [@COSDpool](#): > > A stake pool link protocol was proposed 2½ years ago wow…that is a long time ---
**Author:** ![COSDpool](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cosdpool/32/21482_2.png) [@COSDpool](https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool)\ **Post date:** [1 November 2020 08:38 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/13 "2020-11-01T08:38:26Z")
> [@CardanoCastellano](#): > > I took a look at your CIP, but sorry, I’m not a tech guy, so it is quite difficult for me to give any kind of opinion. @Rodri, thoughts on this? No problem… but I do I feel bad that people are not getting involved in the belief this a “tech issue.” It’s a feature that can be understood & used by non-technical people. For instance if you wanted to make it easy to delegate to a list of 100 special interest pools you could write a link from a pool list like: `web+cardano://stake?SP001&SP002&SP003...&SP100` … with plenty of space (within the maximum length for a web link) to also add numbers, to divide in unequal portions if needed (if you felt the smaller pools needed more help to get up to minimum stake): `web+cardano://stake?SP001=10&SP002=3&SP003=1 ...` Then when people click on that link, it delegates as such in their wallet(s). Simple, but not easy (to implement) as any of the developers will be happy to tell you. And vital… because without integration between web & wallet I don’t see how we could ever have community delegation portfolios (e.g. Hispanic) because we’d have to rely on a centralised source to generate them. The technical detail is there so the developers can have some direction about adding this feature into the wallets & related delegation tools. But you don’t need to be technical to read down to the **Rationale** section to see & support the reasons why the CIP is there, who it would help, and how. You can comment in support of any of these reasons (or suggest changes) without being involved in the details or technical things. > [@CardanoCastellano](#): > > I saw a comment from Sebastien stating that you already have something there, I made a search at Ideascale with “URI scheme” but I was not able to find you. BTW I heard from Sebastien today that they’re having CIP meetings and are looking to move this along, particularly in conjunction with the related CIP for adding web links for payments & payment addresses. This is good news that the proposal is getting positive attention, although we will need popular interest in order to keep the priority high. Here is the Ideascale link: [Community](https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/URIs-for-Stake-Pools-and-Portfolios/324335-48088) > [@CardanoCastellano](#): > > > [@COSDpool](#): > > > > A stake pool link protocol was proposed 2½ years ago > > wow…that is a long time Here is the first appearance of the idea (also in the CIP history): > > > \## Description > > It would be really nice to have a feature that would allow to …create a "payment URL", like: > \`\`\` > ada://send?to=DdzFFz...v7xb&amount=100&fees\_included=true > \`\`\` > > And when someone opens this url in their browser - Daedalus (if installed) opens and shows a special dialog, like "Do you really want to send 100 ADA to this address: \`DdzFFz...v7xb\`?" and if user clicks \`Yes\` then Daed asks him to select a wallet he wants to send coins from. This dialog could also allow to change the transaction amount. > > \## Motivation > > This feature would allow people to create easy-to-use payment links, or for example - donation links, like "Donate 5 ADA | Donate 10 ADA" under some content, so users don't have to copy-paste addresses manually. > > It maybe very useful for some application and could be a nice solution until ecosystem gets SPVs and full-browser integrations, etc. Once those are present - these links could also lead to other clients, like, if I have lite-client or SPV version of Daedalus installed - it is opened from link. If I have a browser-extension installed (possible in the feature) - then browser dialog is opened from link and allows to send coins thru this browser-client. > > \## Implementation > > Sadly I don't know much details for now, but as I understand - browsers are able to associate some types of links (by protocol, a assume) to certain applications (thru OS, probably), so when \`mailto\` is opened - email-client is launched, and when a telegram-link is opened - desktop telegram client pops-up and processes the link. > > I will post comments here, if I get more info about possible implementation details later. It may be too late to comment on the Catalyst project, but it’s the perfect time to comment on the forum page for the CIP, so please post there what you think & get all your friends interested in this issue to chime in 🤠 ---
**Author:** ![CardanoCastellano](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cardanocastellano/32/12309_2.png) [@CardanoCastellano](https://forum.cardano.org/u/CardanoCastellano)\ **Post date:** [4 November 2020 15:39 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/14 "2020-11-04T15:39:03Z")
@COSDpool Your proposal was shared with some of the hispanics SPOs, some of them mentioned that they already know it and were also pushing for it. Did you have the chance to share it on Discord? I also tried to find you there but I was not able to do so. ---
**Author:** ![COSDpool](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/cosdpool/32/21482_2.png) [@COSDpool](https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool)\ **Post date:** [4 November 2020 17:18 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/15 "2020-11-04T17:18:10Z")
thanks @CardanoCastellano, I’m happy for all our sakes that people are independently pushing for the stake pool link proposal, which I work on somehow every day. It might be half way through getting accepted, based on a very welcome private call this week with @SebastienGllmt at Emurgo, in which he requested delaying the multi-pool aspect of the proposal in the interest of getting single pool links implemented ASAP (along with Daedalus payment & address links). I’m on Discord as **rphair [COSD]** and I haven’t sent the proposal to SPOCRA by that means, although I tweeted it via `#SPOCRA` on Twitter, and posted it on the SPOCRA forum a month ago, where it was generally ignored: [https://forums.spocra.io/t/internet-links-for-stake-pools-pool-groups-delegation-portfolios/134](https://forums.spocra.io/t/internet-links-for-stake-pools-pool-groups-delegation-portfolios/134) I have no real interest in, or currently any time for, social networking… but if/when a discussion on stake pool links emerges on Discord please let me know somehow so I can help the discussion along & answer any questions. I would like to get email notifications of a direct message or user name reference on Discord, but there’s [no way to turn email notifications back on](https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360048065672-Re-subscribe-to-email-notifications), so please contact me by Forum DM, Twitter DM, or email. Personally I would rather see 100 personal requests from individually affected pools directly submitted to the relevant people at IOG Marketing, and whoever else might care how the stake centralisation is making Cardano look to the rest of the world, than support a single request through a union representative. However the person they designated as the “concierge to the stake pools” (@benohanlon) hasn’t yet been responding to individual requests (of mine, at least) and seems mainly to be creating more opinion polls and such… it would be much more reassuring to see the marketing people posting on the forum in response to SPOs’ already urgently expressed opinions. In the meantime, what Daedalus (`2.4.0`) did to the small stake pools was like something out of _Game of Thrones_ … I am still trying to figure out if they’re really trying to kill off everybody but the pool conglomerates and usual favourites. So if I could get one honest answer from IOG to one single question today, it would be about the ranking devastation rather than the pool links. Although the “blackout” itself seems more important now, it also makes the pool linking issue even more urgent than it already was. If practically all the small pools have been literally blacked out of Daedalus, we’ll need to _provide delegation links directly_ via our web sites. So I would recommend to everyone: **1 -** make a Github comment in this thread, indicating how/why/when you feel the single-pool stake links are urgent, in a place where the developers will be forced to look at it. Note this “pull request” is being edited down this week so it only includes _single stake pool links_, so those changes can ride in with the Daedalus payment link scheme in a related CIP, which will merge with this one: > > > This pull request is planned for closure as soon as it is merged with \[CIPs: Pay…mentUrls\](https://github.com/Emurgo/CIPs/blob/payment-urls/PaymentUrls/PaymentUrls.md) (\[pull request & discussion\](https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/30)) so that a common URI scheme for both payments & stake pools can be considered as a whole and expedited. > > Therefore this CIP has been modified to propose only single-pool links (\[CIP-COSD-SinglePoolStakeURIscheme.md\](https://github.com/rphair/CIPs/blob/uri-delegation-portfolio/CIP-COSD-MultiPoolStakeURIscheme/CIP-COSD-SinglePoolStakeURIscheme.md)). To view the original proposal for multi-pool links (delegation portfolios), see (\[CIP-COSD-MultiPoolStakeURIscheme.md\](https://github.com/rphair/CIPs/blob/uri-delegation-portfolio/CIP-COSD-MultiPoolStakeURIscheme/CIP-COSD-MultiPoolStakeURIscheme.md)). Multi-pool features will again be requested in the merged CIP after it is approved. > > For full details see https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/25#issuecomment-727620107 later in this thread. **2 -** watch this forum thread, to be notified when a _second_ pull request is created, some time after the merged CIP is accepted for the stake pool links, to include all the changes necessary to support multi-pool delegation portfolios… which will most likely depend upon protocol support for ratio staking and therefore may be a little further down the road (only Sebastien could say when)… and which will eventually address the need for community delegation portfolios as identified in the OP: > [@CIP: Stake URI scheme for pools & delegation portfolios](https://forum.cardano.org/t/cip-stake-uri-scheme-for-pools-delegation-portfolios/40594/15): > > Discussion of the CIP is progressing on this forum thread, with some interest in stake pool portfolio links as a solution for low stake allocation among the largest identified set (via @rodri) of pools affiliated through ethnicity, culture, country and/or language: ---
**Author:** ![nimrod](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex023/user_avatar/forum.cardano.org/nimrod/32/19918_2.png) [@nimrod](https://forum.cardano.org/u/nimrod)\ **Post date:** [6 November 2020 11:44 UTC](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735/16 "2020-11-06T11:44:48Z")
Just showing my support for this CIP. It’s good to see there’s already progress on the [PR](https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/25) on github. I’ve also posted a reply on the original thread for this CIP [[here](https://forum.cardano.org/t/cip-stake-uri-scheme-for-pools-delegation-portfolios/40594/16)] where I think further discussion on this topic is more appropriate. The title of this thread here is very far from the CIP.