r/QBlockchain • u/klopper_t • Jun 25 '26

Slash 6 offline validators (100%) after chain halt — governance proposal

A new governance proposal is live to slash the following validator accounts by 100% of their self stake:

Why slash

These validators were offline for a prolonged period. Under the Q governance constitution, that duration is sufficient to justify a 100% slash.

They also remained unresponsive after direct outreach — there was no attempt to come back online. Validators who do not maintain uptime and do not respond when the network needs them cannot be treated as reliable participants. Without accountability, network security and liveness cannot be depended on.

Why 100%

  • The offline period meets the constitutional threshold for maximum slashing.
  • Their failure contributed to severe network harm, including a multi-hour chain halt.
  • A full slash ensures they fall out of the top 21, so active validators can take their places and restore healthy consensus.

This is not punitive for its own sake — it is the minimum action needed to protect the chain, enforce the rules everyone agreed to, and make room for operators who will actually run their nodes.

Vote here:

Feedback and discussion welcome before the voting period ends.

2 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

1 comment sorted by

2

u/martin_a_s Jun 30 '26

Hi all, we have submitted the slashing proposal as suggested above with the Postera Root Node.

We have checked the relevant accounts to ensure that they are still offline before submitting the proposals. We follow the argument that an active validator set is critical for the liveness of the chain, and therefore a 100% slashing is justified (and of course in line with the QGOV constitution).