# 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:** 1\ **Showing post:** 10
**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… --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.cardano.org/t/latin-america-and-spain-should-also-be-part-of-the-consensus/41735)._