SPO Poll - Q3 2023 Setup Preferences: Answer 1 (Keep k at 500 and minPoolCost at 340 ada)

Governance General Governance Conversation
1

Greetings Stake Pool Operators,

This thread is part of a series of polls aimed at understanding your preferences for the potential parameter changes coming in Q3 2023. The question we’re addressing is:

Which setup would you prefer to be put in place from Q3 2023 onwards?

In this thread, we’re focusing on Answer 1: Keeping k at 500 and minPoolCost at 340 ada.

Please share your thoughts, considerations, and perspective on this specific option. Your insights are valuable for your delegators and will help others understand why you might favor this choice.

Consider addressing the following points in your response:

  • Why you prefer this option: What about this option aligns with your operational approach, growth plans, or other aspects of your stake pool operation?
  • Potential impact on your stake pool: How would this scenario affect your operations, your capacity, your competitiveness, and your ability to attract and retain delegators?
  • Potential impact on the broader Cardano network: How do you see this scenario affecting the overall health, decentralization, and performance of the Cardano network?
  • Additional comments: Any other thoughts or comments you’d like to share about this option or the current state of stake pool operations on Cardano.

Looking forward to a rich and productive discussion!

1 Like
2

Until there is extensive testing I would vote to keep these parameters the same. I would however like to address A0. Why is A0 not being discussed? Instead of changing multiple parameters at the same time, i think A0 should have a bigger impact. Make pledge meaningful again.

3 Likes
3

This ! I think pledge would have more impact.

1 Like
4

Before changing anything, I would like to understand what we are trying to fix. It seems from all the discussion that the main purpose of these changes is to make some unprofitable small pools profitable. I personally think that you can’t achieve these objectives by changing these parameters.

I personally think that if a pool can’t survive with the current settings, it will not survive with any other settings, and if we change k or/and lower minPoolCost again, there will be a lot of SPOs who are not satisfied with those changes (because it is too low or too high or whatever), so we can’t satisfy everyone, unfortunately.

So, bottom line, in my perspective, all these changes are pushed by some SPOs who think that these changes will help them, but in reality, if you can’t survive in the current environment, then you will not be able to survive in any other. That is why I don’t see a point in changing anything. Additionally, I don’t think most delegators really care how much they are earning. Maybe 5-10% of all delegators chase the cheapest and most profitable pools, and those 5% of delegators will not land on small pools, because, again, to get the most profit, it should be 0% pools with almost max out saturation. So, the problem is that there is just not enough delegators for everyone, and changing those parameters will not change the amount of delegators.

If we increase k two times, it doesn’t mean that Binance pools will lose half of their delegators; it just means that Binance will have two times more pools, and all we will achieve is to cut the profit from some successful single pool operators, which have non-zero margin.

Again, this is my perspective about the objective of those changes, and if I’m wrong, I will be more than happy to understand why we are trying to do this or what the purpose of all of this is. At this point, unfortunately, I just think that these changes are useless and will not change much.