This only creates more sell pressure because institutions are capitalistic by nature. Hodlers on the other hand HODL. This proposal only discusses the pros, not the cons. It’s one-sided. Never buy anything from a salesman that never reveal secrets.
If we have more developers which can make decentralized applications and earn from this - we will have a better price of $ZIL at the end because the whole ecosystem will be better. Also a competition between SSN nodes will be honest if we have a minimum SSN commission fee. SSN nodes will attract users with technologies and their contribution to Zilliqa ecosystem and not with low or zero commission fee.
This proposition is juxtaposed with the idea of a free and decentralised community. You cant and should not force people to choose more network beneficial nodes by setting a floor. You instead need to find an alternate structure that aligns personal benefit with network benefit.
Something like nodes who develop their own tokens which have the most network activity who collect the most zil fees are allocated a bigger portion of the staking reward, or similar.
This would incentivise people to chose active nodes by relying on free and open market priciples instead of dictatorial control, whilst incentivising nodes to develop, market, and grow not just their node, but their tokens utility.
A integrating a burn structure might be useful too. Of those fees a portion could be allocated to burn, and the node who results in the most deflation is rewarded with the most inflationary tokens to distribute.
This would impact and make headway to the other inflationary concern too.
For my personal opinion minimum SSN commission fee is better for decentralization. It makes possible an honest competition between SSN nodes where they can attract users with their contribution to Zilliqa ecosystem. Those ones who have zero or close to zero contribution to Zilliqa ecosystem and absolute absence of any tech related to Zilliqa will loose users and it’s normal, it’s honest.
Wouldn’t this proposal drive out the small validators?
it will just end up with large validators surviving and thus becoming more and more centralized.
When gzil voting already? Wasn’t it supposed to happen last week already?
No, this proposal is not against small validators. Actually this proposal will increase decentralization. That’s why I support it so much. Right now many large validators are large not because they contributed a lot to Zilliqa but because they had low commissions for years. Moreover I would say that current situation without changes is killing small validators. When someone can make 0% fee, how small validators can survive? This situation needs to be changed as soon as possible. And you will see after this who remains with those SSN nodes who never contributed to Zilliqa. People will not stake with them.
The proposal is now live for voting on Snapshot:
IS it just me? or does it take FOREVER to load?
Validators who contribute to the ecosystem suffer due to the infrastructure costs that have risen upon the overall market situation now and it can be a step towards
improvement of the situation. The Zilliqa community is supportive and cares about the ecosystem. Anyway, the choice will be right!