Replicated Security Reimagined: Jeonse and Package Differentiation Proposal

[taron]

Thank you all for your insightful opinions and ideas.

@Vadim_Everstake

The first option somewhat counters that by obliging CC to cover infra costs with its own funds. Should cc apply for a donation from Community Pool, in this case, to be delegated to validators under a special delegation program with periodic revision?

We agree that our first option may seem to increase the burden for Consumer Chains (CC) by requiring them to cover infrastructural costs. We should stress that this approach is intended as a long-term solution and will be implemented gradually, not instantly. A special delegation program, as suggested, could be an effective interim measure, allowing validators to receive funds while the CC prepares to take on these costs. It can be a bridge solution, offering a more sustainable model compared to the current situation.

@Vadim_Everstake

2nd option sounds reasonable, but it needs to have a possibility for the validators to pick the model for themselves and change it once a week (e.g.). That option still has room for opting out for validators who simply cannot scale at the moment, while leaving an option for ready-to-scale small validators to pick the preferred revenue model and take higher risks.

We appreciate the idea of allowing validators to select and adjust their revenue model. We initially thought of this on a monthly basis, as operational costs are typically calculated and incurred monthly. However, we understand that different validators have different capabilities and needs, so offering the option to make changes on a shorter timescale (e.g., weekly) could be beneficial. We need to ensure that our model offers enough flexibility for validators to manage their risks and margins effectively.

@Vadim_Everstake

Hub’s community pool may be used as a fund for the “delegation” lottery, available only for the small validators who support customer chains.

The suggestion to use the Hub’s community pool for a “delegation lottery” for small validators who support customer chains is an interesting one. While we see the potential short-term appeal, we’re also considering the long-term, scalable solutions for our ecosystem. This proposal could be further explored in combination with a basic income approach, and the implementation of time-risk preferences in validator selection. However, it should be subjected to an in-depth discussion within the community to ensure we make balanced and sustainable decisions.

Thanks a lot!