Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Proposal: remove self-staking requirement #17

Open
zjshen14 opened this issue Jan 31, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Proposal: remove self-staking requirement #17

zjshen14 opened this issue Jan 31, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@zjshen14
Copy link
Contributor

It seems not necessary to enforce the delegate account to self stake, which is not friendly to asset custody. People who manages the delegate profile, reward distribution doesn't need to be the one who manages the asset.

If we do need a primary responder (e.g., slashing for doing bad things) for a delegate, this could be a different address, similar to operator address.

@dustinxie
Copy link
Member

Self-stake purpose is (like you mentioned) "need a primary responder (e.g., slashing for doing bad things)", if we use a different address, it is still "self-stake" but to a different address? Put it another way, what are the benefits of using a different address to receive the "self-stake" token?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants