You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
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.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
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?
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.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: