Delegation plan
Overview
The primary objective of this delegation plan is to promote a robust, secure, and decentralized blockchain network by carefully selecting validators based on performance, reliability, community involvement, and additional services they provide to the network.
See the sections below to learn the details of the plan.
Buenavista performance
During Buenavista, the Warden Protocol team will be running a series of exercises with validators. The aim of these exercises is to test and prepare for a future mainnet event where the team will be delegating a portion of its token supply to qualifying validators.
Delegation criteria
Validators are evaluated based on a combination of positive and negative metrics. Each metric contributes to the validator's overall score, determining their eligibility and priority in the delegation process. This ensures that only the most reliable and active validators are chosen to maintain and secure the network.
These metrics are, to name a few:
- Activity, Community engagement, blog posts
- Uptime
- Services provided
- Buenavista performance
Amount of tokens
At mainnet, the Warden Protocol team intends to delegate 10% of its token supply to validators.
Validator tiers
Validators will be categorized into four different tiers.
Each of these tiers will get a percentage of the delegation pool allocated during the mainnet launch.
| Tiers | Amount | Number of validators | % / Validator | % Total | Total delegation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 Million | 5 | 4% | 20% | 5 Million |
| 2 | 750,000 | 5 | 3% | 15% | 3,75 Million |
| 3 | 625,000 | 10 | 2,5% | 25% | 6,25 Million |
| 4 | 250,000 | 40 | 1% | 40% | 10 Million |
Note: Amounts are expressed in WARD tokens.
Validator requirements
Validators who want to attract delegations must comply with essential network support standards to sustain their delegations. If they fail to meet these standards, they may lose their delegations.
These standards include:
- Commission Rate up to: 10%
- Uptime at least 95%
- Governance participation of at least 80%
- Minimal slashing rate
- Timely upgrades and responsiveness to protocol release
Note: Validators are slashed when they demonstrate malicious behavior.
Undelegation criteria
- Getting slashed/tombstoned (can't apply for 1 year afterward)
- Getting jailed more than once during the quarter-applicable delegation period
- Failing to upgrade your node in a timely manner (24 hours or less)
- For any other reason, at the Warden Protocol team's discretion
- Failed to meet the commitments set by the Warden Protocol team
Reallocation program
The Warden Protocol team will periodically reallocate tokens to balance the network and review the Validators' commitments.
Feedback process
Validators in the program will receive a feedback form every quarter, so the program can be continually improved.
How to choose a validator?
Delegators have several criteria to consider when choosing validators to delegate their tokens to. Here are some key factors that delegator may want to take into account when selecting validators:
Self-bonded WARD: The amount of WARD a validator self-bonds to its staking pools is an important indicator of their commitment and investment into the networks. Validators with a higher amount of self-bonded WARD have greater “skin in the game”, and are perceived as being more reliable, trustworthy and liable for their actions.
Delegated WARD: The total amount for WARD delegated to a validator reflects the level of trust and confidence the community has in that validator. A validator with a large stake of delegate WARD may be considered more reputable, but may also make them a bigger target for malicious actors, potentially impacting network security.
Commission rate: The commission rate set by the validator determines the portion of staking rewards that the validator retains for themselves, rather than distributing it to their delegators.
Track records: Delegators can look at the track record of a validator they plan to delegate to. This includes seniority in the network, past votes on proposals, uptime and the reliability of the validator, how often the node was compromised. Validators with a positive track record are more trusted by delegators.
Community contribution: Another criteria is the work validators have contributed to the community, such as educational content, participation in community channels, contributions to open source initiatives etc. Community contribution demonstrates a commitment to the long-term success and growth of the network.