English is definitely not my main language, I am very sorry if you feel that way.
Perhaps you will find sweeter answers that add to the 1/ which I did not detailed on purpose cause it was pretty well debated here:
I think I did not clearly made my point in the last sentences, there is no harm wanting to join the validator set or having personnal interest nor that I did judge you at any moment.
With that said I think it’s too easy to pull that card whenever you don’t want to reply to someone. We are all here to learn something and I am the first one to ask to get challenged on my opinion.
@jacobgadikian Regarding ICF, I did oversimplify the traits and remove parts of my reply which would have made it too long. I do know there is politic involved and ofc their decision was biased.
If you want to strive as validators you either need connections with the right people with big bags/influence or you need to create only exposure to the regular cosmonaut that I am.
My point is Cosmos is an organised chaos.
Proof of it is their POV of fairness did not match yours, you will now try to establish a balance based on your own biases.
There is a balance to everything, at the end of the day some will loose some will strive.
@waqarmmirza going back to your arguments in favor of decentralization, you can surely add validators, it will only dillute the ‘weakest’, 25 new validators would be less than 1.5% of total VP. You are not balancing VP at all since it is already accumulated at the top. (top 14 having more than 50%VP currently).
Decentralization argument has been written on every single active validator set expension prop yet proven widdly false.
I recommend you to check out the other thread since some interesting ideas are thrown in the wild regarding decentralization and overall why expending the validator set ATM is a good/bad idea.
Once again sorry for offending you, that’s truely not my purpose