Power in decentralization #3447
Conversation
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC", vm.ErrNilNodesCoordinator) | ||
| } | ||
| if args.StakingSCConfig.NodeLimitPercentage < minPercentage { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC", vm.ErrInvalidNodeLimitPercentage) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC for NodeLimitPercentage", vm.ErrInvalidNodeLimitPercentage)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no. as you would duplicate the node limit percentage write
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, now I've saw ErrInvalidNodeLimitPercentage vs ErrInvalidStakeLimitPercentage
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC", vm.ErrInvalidNodeLimitPercentage) | ||
| } | ||
| if args.StakingSCConfig.StakeLimitPercentage < minPercentage { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC", vm.ErrInvalidStakeLimitPercentage) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fmt.Errorf("%w in validatorSC for StakeLimitPercentage", vm.ErrInvalidNodeLimitPercentage)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no. as you would duplicate the stake limit percentage write
| nodesCoordinator: args.NodesCoordinator, | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| reg.totalStakeLimit = core.GetIntTrimmedPercentageOfValue(args.GenesisTotalSupply, args.StakingSCConfig.StakeLimitPercentage) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One idea spread in the office is to drop the stake limitation on the SP and only keep the node percentage limitation. In this way the "market" for the SPs will equalize itself while keeping the ability to absorb unstaked funds.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I pretty much like "not getting involved" in office ideas.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After further discussions, can be left as it is in order to have some implemented control over the stake. The percentage can be later established.
Power in decentralization