What expect next from Game of Stakes
So we said Monday for Game of Stakes and we are having a meeting Monday morning Pacific time to make a call on when exactly we will launch.
Gaia-9001 is going amazing so we are definitely nearly there.
You are already seeing early game of stakes style competition with validators moving to quickly withdraw and bond their inflationary rewards.
There are some things we’ve been thinking about.
Start
One of things I am thinking about is setting the min and max inflation such that large inflation doesn’t kick until after the Tendermint validators unbind.
This makes it a much smaller advantage to start your validator immediately at genesis and makes things fairer for people in all timezones.
Think can be done setting a min inflation of 1% and max inflation of 1000% and allocation 90% of starting tokens to the Tendermint validators.
We are having a meeting Monday morning Pacific time to discuss timing out GoS launch but I don’t want anyone to stay awake all night and I think this is a viable solution.
Software Updates
Attacks like Interaction between non-continuity of inflation and proposer reward · Issue #2763 · cosmos/cosmos-sdk · GitHub are exactly the kind of thing we would like to see in Game Of Stakes but we don’t attackers to be able to block network upgrades.
When there are Tendermint proposed upgrades/ fixes / changes to the state machine, we will only consider a blockchain that incorporates them when recommending winners to the Interchain Foundation.
Governance Challenge
Other than the situation above, we will consider governance binding. If players decide to use governance to upgrade to a non Tendermint produced version of the software we will give the proposer a substantial stake reward from the Tendermint stake wallet.
Distribution of the Winners.
We intend to use pretty broad discretion in deciding how to recommend winners to the Interchain Foundation. If we lots of interesting and novel behavior we will probably have a robust set of 2nd, 3rd and 4th place winners. If we see mostly defensive behavior, we will recommend a broader distribution to everyone who credibly participated.
Disqualification
We will also use our discretion to disqualify players who are exploiting undisclosed vulnerability or abusing the system by for instance delegating all their stake together.
We want to see interesting attacks like #2673 rather than abuses of the system.