Curious about CIP-163?
Find the full CIP here
Want to receive updates in your inbox?
Does CIP-163 hurt small pools?
No. Generally this doesn’t affect pools differently whether they are large or small, but it might help some newer pools to compete against old ones if the old ones have a lot of lost/sticky stake.
Can CIP-163 be run in the Reward Sharing Scheme simulator?
Not easily since agents in the simulator don’t spontaneously become dormant. But maybe with a considerable amount of refactoring.
What about stake in retired pools?
This actually isn’t really an issue because that stake doesn’t produce blocks, earn rewards, or contribute voting power. It is effectively removed from circulation in that sense.
My pool has lots of sticky stake, I might lose out from this change!
Even if lots of that sticky stake expires, you might still end up with more rewards due to the full pot rewards distribution part of this CIP.
Want to see if your pool really does have a lot of sticky stake? Check out our tool to see how much inactive stake your pool has here: Inactive Stake Tool
What about the social contract that my stake will continue accumulating forever?
- That promise is not formally defined, it is implicit, unclear, and may not exist.
- Did the promise imply that the protocol will never change?
- If there is a social contract it should be put in the Constitution so that it can be designed around in the future.
- We have put conditions on the rewards before; requirement to select a dRep:
- “you can’t access rewards already earned unless you do X.”
- CIP-163:
- “you won’t earn new rewards unless you do X.”
What if lots of stake expires at once?
That’s why we have it together with full-pot rewards distribution, which incentivizes new delegations. Also see how much stake would currently be affected by different parameter settings:
Want to receive updates in your inbox?