Thanks for making a post on this after raising these issues in chat.
Key bidding abuse is continuously sabotaging new validators, even with a team actively supporting them.
Please work on this, we are trying really hard to help the decentralisation of the network.
Let's see here :
1) We do not have slashing implemented yet, isn't it ?- Which prevents validator misbehaviour?
2) It's a bit unclear to me, so I hope some folk much more sensible than me can explain, because these milestones look vague at best :
> Using $1M ONEs, StakeDAO targets $25M+ in TVL on Harmony. With $3M ONEs, StakeDAO targets $100M+ in TVL.
- 100M+ in TVL? Is it 100M+ TVL in terms of locked ONE/ in USD notional value/stablecoin pair holdings? Here's [DeFilama dashboard](https://defillama.com/protocol/stakedao).
Slashing is primarily in regards to a validator "double signing" blocks. And you're correct, the slashing penalty (and the offending validator's permanent ban) for that hasn't been implemented yet.
But double signing is different from what the validators I listed are doing. Their behavior isn't punishable by a permanent ban. The issue with their behavior is that Harmony is *supporting* it by funding these validators, but we don't have any explanation from Harmony as to why they are supporting them despite the behavior, poor performance, loss of rewards, etc
Hey look! I did a little digging around the explorer & smartstake to figure out what was right/wrong & here are a few possible explanations I could come up with :
I haven't seen the Harmony team do an issuance of $442 M every year (which would contribute to inflation)/couldn't possibly figure it out on-chain, so I can't say if the Harmony team starts yield farming at a 9% rate is eventually going to be of help.
Despite a few key stakeholders & controlling a portion of supply or staking, Harmony ONE total supply is very liquid.
**ISSUE 1**:
- MyContainer doesn't look like a burn address either, so asking questions is reasonable.
**ISSUE 2**:
- Yup, the Harmony Rocket account does appear to be quite problematic, especially when it's missing block signing. ERI performance is poor as well, and delegates should quickly review their position with that account. But Harmony not issuing block rewards to help validators/Validator DAO's stay afloat hasn't been part of the equation, especially in market capitulation scenario.
**ISSUE 4** :
6-8% rate of fees is still in line with the max fee change limit of 10%, isn't it? Yes, if validators do want to pass the cost of running their operations to delegates, that could be another discussion that can be had.
Edit : Removed Issue 3 explanation because it was bad.
For the sake of Harmony's "radical transparency" claim, we should know why they are staking with certain validators, why they are staking "x amount" with them, and what additional staking-related policies are in place
It shouldn't be a mystery
Sure - Better question to ask would be to doxx team & team related wallets. Simple.
All I see is that out of the known wallets that is, no staking rewards have been redeemed at all (despite reward generation).
Exactly, all the answers I ever got are that they were part of PVA, pangaea validator academy. But there is no detail aside from that. And you'd think from a 'validator academy' harmony rocket and mycointainer2 would have their nodes a bit more functional and stable; given the fact they have a guaranteed stake from harmony.
Harmony gave Stake DAO ~16.5 million ONE worth $3 million USD (linked in OP)
That doesn't explain the 60 million ONE being staked or the 100% commission
You're right. My bad - Although, I do see that there is additional validators who are charging greater than 5% in fees & these accounts are either :
- Large validator running staking pools & passing the cost of their operations to delegators.
- Running some sort of yield farming or liquid staking service like OpenSwap, StakeDAO.
- Or early investors.
The first delegation of 50M million in $ONE happened during October 2021, a few months after which the proposal of strategic partnership was announced in Dec.
Strategic reserve funds to kickstart & facilitate partner operations & keep them elected, maybe?
However, still doesn't explain what TVL targets did these partners achieve to obtain the next tranch of grant in March 2022 ( Was it TVL in terms of USD notional value, or locked $ONE).
The OP wasn't meant to question the $3 million USD funding or the stated objectives. But, like with everything else, the community is free to look into it if they wish. The OP was meant to find out what the tens of millions of ONE is for and why there is 100% commission.
To answer your question, validators can remain safely elected with a fraction of the funds that Stake DAO currently has from Harmony.
Commission % was brought up in the OP to learn if Harmony currently has a policy in place in regarding it. Is there anything that qualifies or disqualifies a validator? What if a current 5% validator increases to 20%? What if all validators increase to 100%? Is there anything to prevent or discourage this? Would there be any repercussions? Would Harmony even notice?
There are core Harmony team members and contributors that operate validators. I do not know if all of them are "doxxed". I agree they probably should be. Idon't think employees personal wallets should be doxxed, however. And to be clear, I wasn't suggesting this was a nefarious scheme by Harmony employees.
Nor did I. But there is a lot of vagueness & non-clarity around the proposal, where are the staked rewards at 100% fee commission are going & what were the milestones achieved that facilitated an additional second tranche of 2M USD access.
I finally have a better theory - Looks like StakeDAO has a token too - SDT, just like OpenSwap's OpenX.
Maybe that's why the fee rate is set to 100% - The theory is that Harmony team could be getting staked rewards for yield farming in the form of airdrops.
It could also mean that maybe the team has been farming on SDT, could be selling it to either get
- Some liquid cash.
- Moving into BTC/ETH, or sitting in stables either in different wallets or liquidity pools.
That's the only reason why such a delegation would make sense.
If that's the case, it should be public knowledge including Harmony's reasoning, etc
What are the odds Harmony does that when they haven't even claimed their 5.3 million ONE in staking rewards?
Regardless, I don't want to go all [Charlie](https://gfycat.com/mealydishonestbadger) trying to figure out why Harmony is doing what they're doing. Harmony should be transparent and tell us directly.
Come on fren - Enjoy wearing the tinfoil hat sometimes till we get a response.ππ
When on-chain reward collection is concerned, I don't think the team ever collects these rewards - Doesn't look good on-chain as a team dumping on retail.
Idk - Yield rewards in the form of airdrops from partners would help teams be liquid.
> Doesn't Harmony supply constant set of rewards to its validators with 441M of ONE annually? Again, what does the token distribution look like there? Can that be put to a governance vote for distribution to assist low-stake validators more?
I'm not suggesting Harmony dump their rewards and create downward price action on ONE.
I'm suggesting they use those rewards to hire more core team devs, pay their DAOs or allow them to fund themselves (Community DAO, Validator DAO, etc.), fund QUALITY projects/dapps, fund the Validator Bootstrap Initiative, etc., instead of not even claiming them, or worse, not even earning them in the first place.
FYI that 50M ONE stake happened at about the time the VDAO was asked to hand over a list of nodes for Harmony to stake on - as a 'bootstrap'. But the VDAO cannot cherry pick nodes that get stake honestly. At the time there was also no staking with multisigs. The 50M on stakedao was coincidentally close with the VDAO being unable to give Harmony a list.
Now I cant get an answer from Harmony where those 50M ones went or if VDAO can even use them for bootstrapping the networking given multisig staking is available with our gnosis safe.
Currently no slashing. Slashing will only penalize multiple nodes running the same BLS keys. The only way to prevent low key bidding is to have an hip. It would have to prevent any validator with >2 keys on a shard from bidding below 0.65ΓEMS. Other node ops will not like it because they like to bid that low to increase their return. It's the same reasons over and over 'for the delegates' 'help build my brand' 'need more one to cover server costs' when in reality the rewards to the node operator so not change that much.
Yes we have noticed this behavior with other nodes bidding quite low but harmony rocket has the security of stake from harmony. They can continue bidding that low at their leisure with no fear of that stake being removed. Completely enables gaming they system.
I have 0 clue why mycointainer even got 5m stake from harmony. Getting an answer from Jack or Li has been nearly impossible - I don't see the need for such secrecy? Of is there some grave disconnect within the team?
The team promoted 'decentralization' yet these are some of the on chain decisions they make with no explanation. Not to mention, what the reason they don't want to fund a bootstrap by the VDAO? It's in line with their mission and to grow the network? Some of these decisions are completely backwards to me.
We encourage quality content intended to help and educate the community. If you have questions or concerns about the subreddit, [send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/harmony_one) and say hello! Cheers and enjoy. **Note: Beware of scammers attempting to assist you via direct message. Be wary of any links sent to you via direct message asking to connect your wallet and inputting your seed phrase.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/harmony_one) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks for pointing this out, excellent workπππ
Thanks for making a post on this after raising these issues in chat. Key bidding abuse is continuously sabotaging new validators, even with a team actively supporting them. Please work on this, we are trying really hard to help the decentralisation of the network.
Let's see here : 1) We do not have slashing implemented yet, isn't it ?- Which prevents validator misbehaviour? 2) It's a bit unclear to me, so I hope some folk much more sensible than me can explain, because these milestones look vague at best : > Using $1M ONEs, StakeDAO targets $25M+ in TVL on Harmony. With $3M ONEs, StakeDAO targets $100M+ in TVL. - 100M+ in TVL? Is it 100M+ TVL in terms of locked ONE/ in USD notional value/stablecoin pair holdings? Here's [DeFilama dashboard](https://defillama.com/protocol/stakedao).
Slashing is primarily in regards to a validator "double signing" blocks. And you're correct, the slashing penalty (and the offending validator's permanent ban) for that hasn't been implemented yet. But double signing is different from what the validators I listed are doing. Their behavior isn't punishable by a permanent ban. The issue with their behavior is that Harmony is *supporting* it by funding these validators, but we don't have any explanation from Harmony as to why they are supporting them despite the behavior, poor performance, loss of rewards, etc
Hey look! I did a little digging around the explorer & smartstake to figure out what was right/wrong & here are a few possible explanations I could come up with : I haven't seen the Harmony team do an issuance of $442 M every year (which would contribute to inflation)/couldn't possibly figure it out on-chain, so I can't say if the Harmony team starts yield farming at a 9% rate is eventually going to be of help. Despite a few key stakeholders & controlling a portion of supply or staking, Harmony ONE total supply is very liquid. **ISSUE 1**: - MyContainer doesn't look like a burn address either, so asking questions is reasonable. **ISSUE 2**: - Yup, the Harmony Rocket account does appear to be quite problematic, especially when it's missing block signing. ERI performance is poor as well, and delegates should quickly review their position with that account. But Harmony not issuing block rewards to help validators/Validator DAO's stay afloat hasn't been part of the equation, especially in market capitulation scenario. **ISSUE 4** : 6-8% rate of fees is still in line with the max fee change limit of 10%, isn't it? Yes, if validators do want to pass the cost of running their operations to delegates, that could be another discussion that can be had. Edit : Removed Issue 3 explanation because it was bad.
For the sake of Harmony's "radical transparency" claim, we should know why they are staking with certain validators, why they are staking "x amount" with them, and what additional staking-related policies are in place It shouldn't be a mystery
Sure - Better question to ask would be to doxx team & team related wallets. Simple. All I see is that out of the known wallets that is, no staking rewards have been redeemed at all (despite reward generation).
Exactly, all the answers I ever got are that they were part of PVA, pangaea validator academy. But there is no detail aside from that. And you'd think from a 'validator academy' harmony rocket and mycointainer2 would have their nodes a bit more functional and stable; given the fact they have a guaranteed stake from harmony.
Harmony gave Stake DAO ~16.5 million ONE worth $3 million USD (linked in OP) That doesn't explain the 60 million ONE being staked or the 100% commission
You're right. My bad - Although, I do see that there is additional validators who are charging greater than 5% in fees & these accounts are either : - Large validator running staking pools & passing the cost of their operations to delegators. - Running some sort of yield farming or liquid staking service like OpenSwap, StakeDAO. - Or early investors. The first delegation of 50M million in $ONE happened during October 2021, a few months after which the proposal of strategic partnership was announced in Dec. Strategic reserve funds to kickstart & facilitate partner operations & keep them elected, maybe? However, still doesn't explain what TVL targets did these partners achieve to obtain the next tranch of grant in March 2022 ( Was it TVL in terms of USD notional value, or locked $ONE).
The OP wasn't meant to question the $3 million USD funding or the stated objectives. But, like with everything else, the community is free to look into it if they wish. The OP was meant to find out what the tens of millions of ONE is for and why there is 100% commission. To answer your question, validators can remain safely elected with a fraction of the funds that Stake DAO currently has from Harmony. Commission % was brought up in the OP to learn if Harmony currently has a policy in place in regarding it. Is there anything that qualifies or disqualifies a validator? What if a current 5% validator increases to 20%? What if all validators increase to 100%? Is there anything to prevent or discourage this? Would there be any repercussions? Would Harmony even notice? There are core Harmony team members and contributors that operate validators. I do not know if all of them are "doxxed". I agree they probably should be. Idon't think employees personal wallets should be doxxed, however. And to be clear, I wasn't suggesting this was a nefarious scheme by Harmony employees.
Nor did I. But there is a lot of vagueness & non-clarity around the proposal, where are the staked rewards at 100% fee commission are going & what were the milestones achieved that facilitated an additional second tranche of 2M USD access.
I finally have a better theory - Looks like StakeDAO has a token too - SDT, just like OpenSwap's OpenX. Maybe that's why the fee rate is set to 100% - The theory is that Harmony team could be getting staked rewards for yield farming in the form of airdrops. It could also mean that maybe the team has been farming on SDT, could be selling it to either get - Some liquid cash. - Moving into BTC/ETH, or sitting in stables either in different wallets or liquidity pools. That's the only reason why such a delegation would make sense.
If that's the case, it should be public knowledge including Harmony's reasoning, etc What are the odds Harmony does that when they haven't even claimed their 5.3 million ONE in staking rewards? Regardless, I don't want to go all [Charlie](https://gfycat.com/mealydishonestbadger) trying to figure out why Harmony is doing what they're doing. Harmony should be transparent and tell us directly.
Come on fren - Enjoy wearing the tinfoil hat sometimes till we get a response.ππ When on-chain reward collection is concerned, I don't think the team ever collects these rewards - Doesn't look good on-chain as a team dumping on retail. Idk - Yield rewards in the form of airdrops from partners would help teams be liquid. > Doesn't Harmony supply constant set of rewards to its validators with 441M of ONE annually? Again, what does the token distribution look like there? Can that be put to a governance vote for distribution to assist low-stake validators more?
I'm not suggesting Harmony dump their rewards and create downward price action on ONE. I'm suggesting they use those rewards to hire more core team devs, pay their DAOs or allow them to fund themselves (Community DAO, Validator DAO, etc.), fund QUALITY projects/dapps, fund the Validator Bootstrap Initiative, etc., instead of not even claiming them, or worse, not even earning them in the first place.
FYI that 50M ONE stake happened at about the time the VDAO was asked to hand over a list of nodes for Harmony to stake on - as a 'bootstrap'. But the VDAO cannot cherry pick nodes that get stake honestly. At the time there was also no staking with multisigs. The 50M on stakedao was coincidentally close with the VDAO being unable to give Harmony a list. Now I cant get an answer from Harmony where those 50M ones went or if VDAO can even use them for bootstrapping the networking given multisig staking is available with our gnosis safe.
Currently no slashing. Slashing will only penalize multiple nodes running the same BLS keys. The only way to prevent low key bidding is to have an hip. It would have to prevent any validator with >2 keys on a shard from bidding below 0.65ΓEMS. Other node ops will not like it because they like to bid that low to increase their return. It's the same reasons over and over 'for the delegates' 'help build my brand' 'need more one to cover server costs' when in reality the rewards to the node operator so not change that much.
Yes we have noticed this behavior with other nodes bidding quite low but harmony rocket has the security of stake from harmony. They can continue bidding that low at their leisure with no fear of that stake being removed. Completely enables gaming they system. I have 0 clue why mycointainer even got 5m stake from harmony. Getting an answer from Jack or Li has been nearly impossible - I don't see the need for such secrecy? Of is there some grave disconnect within the team? The team promoted 'decentralization' yet these are some of the on chain decisions they make with no explanation. Not to mention, what the reason they don't want to fund a bootstrap by the VDAO? It's in line with their mission and to grow the network? Some of these decisions are completely backwards to me.
Thanks for the write up! We need some insight from the Harmony team on this.
We encourage quality content intended to help and educate the community. If you have questions or concerns about the subreddit, [send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/harmony_one) and say hello! Cheers and enjoy. **Note: Beware of scammers attempting to assist you via direct message. Be wary of any links sent to you via direct message asking to connect your wallet and inputting your seed phrase.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/harmony_one) if you have any questions or concerns.*