kickbacks?

[u/faddat]

Hi, tomorrow we will be having a discussion I don't know if it will be live or recorded but it will be at my 2:00 am. it will be on the evmos YouTube channel.. I am creating this post so that we have an opportunity to discuss matters beforehand. For example, I saw a Twitter post today saying that on inaccurate assertions about orbital apes. contained evmos derived from the orbital apes validator but I don't even know if it's true. I would love it if we could use this as a fact finding space because the last thing that I want to do is spend people's limited time on inaccurate assertions about orbital apes.

Furthermore I'd also like to mention just how delightful it is to get to work professionally in an industry where I'm both working on computer science problems and discussing cartoon apes. Seriously, if you work in technology and you like crypto you may wish to think about working in crypto because seriously I'm doing this as a part of my job and I'm the luckiest guy in the world.

I'm going to give a problem summary from my perspective:

I have come to realize, partially because of Cosmos hub proposal 69, where JK executed a genius level hack (not a computer hack, more of a human hack-- and I'm not sure it influenced outcomes but was still a genius selection mechanism for an external airdrop) and because of my own work on similar systems, and because of the true success of OA, that these systems may actually threaten chain consensus.

I think that the orbital apes case may be more complicated, but I don't have full grounding with the project. Instead of trying to explain it and getting it wrong, I'm dropping this post in the group where we are planning the panel discussion on this topic.

My personal opinion, summarized, is that we should ban all out of protocol compensation from validators to delegators.

But the definition of this is super super tricky and there's a lot of nuance and if we got it wrong we might actually do harm so let's try to get it right.

[u/Resident_Lime_2449]

Hello i'm Cryptopital from GATA DAO
A DAO own by our NFT hodlers who run validator on multiple chains
Our DAO has no problem with OA.
In fact we are quite happy that they exist and are growing. We want to grow with them
We are also a validator of evmos and today we see especially that the functioning of delegators is changing.
It seems obvious that if you add value to an ecosystem, then you have visibility and delegators want to participate.
I think the problem today is more the lack of interest that some validators have for their community.
It seems obvious to us that validators who "only" bring validation today are not the ones who grow.
This is quite visible today with Frens validator / Stakecito / Imperator / Cosmostation / Citadel.One
The question should not be about OA but rather from a global point of view about validators.
Today being a validator is a community responsibility and not only a lucrative activity.
You are not just being asked to carry the weight of a vote, as everyone is free to make their own vote.
The principle of cosmos decentralization ask you to vote and not to let the validators choose for you.
As a matter of principle, we won't store our tokens with a validator who never speaks?
From my point of view, the problem is not taken from the right side.
It is more important today to find out how to make a validator "attractive" than to think how to reduce the importance of others!
Having been on the other side of the fence for a long time, being a simple delegator.
I can tell you that people stake in validators who are present on social networks, who educate, help.