Request for Alteration of the ICF delegation program Cycle 2

[Cosmic_Validator]

@Ertemann

We propose the ICF Re-calculates their delegations with a point cap but EXCLUDES all delegations made by them in Cycle 1.

Before the final updated ICF Delegation Policy for the cycle 2 and before the application period started, the ICF requested feedback here from validators and the community and considered a lot of this feedback to update and improve the new Delegation Policy (ICF Delegations Policy v2.0). Why are you providing this feedback months later after the evaluations have been completed and the new redelegations are about to be implemented rather than months ago when the ICF was requesting feedback?

Furthermore, you were actually aware about this feedback period and even provided your own feedback about relayers (ICF Delegations Policy v2.0 - #12 by schultzie), but at that time you never said anything about the CAP points system, you are giving this feedback months later once the evaluations have been completed. Why did you think that the CAP points system was a good idea during the feedback period and you didn’t recommend any modification to the CAP points system, but now after the evaluations you want to modify the evaluation criteria that was previously agreed and confirmed?

@Ertemann

We will lose 430k Delegations, and then gain 80k putting us at roughly spot ~110.

Why do you say 430k delegations? According to the documents from the ICF about the Cycle 1 you were awarded 19 points and a delegation of 256,065 ATOM.

@Ertemann

We solicited feedback from other validators and many in the top 25 of contributions felt very similar, they are being punished for contributing consistently in both last and this period. Its demotivating and will only create further friction between the ICF and the validator community.

In the Cycle 1 all contributions were awarded equally 1 point, without considering the amount of resources, time or effort of each contribution as in the case of the Cycle 2. So, some validators who submitted many lower effort contributions received very large delegations for 6 months, other validators with fewer contributions involving more resources and time received low delegations since 1 point was awarded for all contributions. In the Cycle 1, Lavender Five received 19 points, according to your VP rank you knew that your cap would be 15 points in Cycle 2, but you didn’t say anything or recommended to modify the CAP points system. After the evaluations were completed and you didn’t like the results then you suggest to change the evaluation criteria. If you had received 15 points or less, then you wouldn’t have suggested any modification.