This brief article starts by sharing the background and motivations behind this feature and is then followed by a high-level description of the design of the delegation toggle .
The full article can be found here.
1 Like
I think that adding a delegation toggle goes to the right direction, but it doesn’t solve other problems.
For example: baker A capacity is 8,000 XTZ, delegator B delegates its 8,000 XTZ balance and then baker toggle the delegation off. Delegator B now receives an Y amount of XTZ and so baker goes overdelegated. Edit: and what’s more problematic is that the baker should constantly check if any of his delegators received more XTZ (or sent/reduced its balance) and toggle on/off accordingly.
I think that the solution is that the protocol should calculate the maximum capacity and then assign the rolls accordingly.
1 Like
Another problem: baker needs 50 XTZ delegated to reach the next roll and it cannot handle more. If baker toggle off it might not reach the next roll, but if keep it on it might receive an overdelegation.
1 Like
It is not necessary to look at each delegator’s balance. Just look at the ‘staking balance’ which is the total of all delegators. It’s not as problematic as you think.
Yes, I know, but it shouldn’t be this way. I think bakers shouldn’t have to constantly keep an eye on an explorer in order to tweak their settings.
This kind of manual interventions are not what Tezos should aims. Let the protocol handle it.
