Proposal: Maximum Staking Cap per Validator in Story L1

Proposals
,
1

Background

Currently, in Story L1, there is no maximum limit on the number of tokens that can be staked to a single validator. However, a minimum requirement of 1,024 IP tokens is needed to register a validator.

The absence of a staking cap can lead to stake centralization, which introduces security risks. Specifically, if a single validator accumulates ≥ 1/3 of the total staked tokens, it can disrupt network finality or halt the chain if it goes offline. This scenario reduces network resilience and increases the risk of validator cartels forming.

Proposal

To enhance decentralization and network security, we propose introducing an upper bound on the number of tokens that can be staked to a single validator. While this measure does not prevent validator collusion, it reduces the likelihood of excessive stake concentration and mitigates systemic risks.

Staking Cap Calculation

  • Total Token Supply (TGE): S=1,000,000,000 tokens
  • Maximum Active Validators: V=64
  • Proposed Per-Validator Cap: C=15,000,000 tokens

This cap ensures that even if all 64 validators are at the cap, the total staked tokens remain within:

V×C=64×15,000,000=960,000,000

which is < 100% of total supply, leaving room for unstaked tokens.

Assuming 25-60% of tokens are eventually staked, the maximum possible stake share for a single validator under this cap is:

image
image960×216 13.6 KB

Thus, this cap significantly reduces the risk of a single validator exceeding the critical 1/3 threshold while maintaining flexibility for delegation.

Implementation Strategy

  1. Migration Plan:
  • If any existing validators exceed the 15,000,000 token threshold at the time of deployment, delegators will be required to redelegate excess stakes to other validators within a specified period.
  • A governance vote may determine the grace period before enforcement.
  1. Enforcement Mechanism:
  • After enforcement, if a validator’s stake exceeds 15,000,000 tokens, its voting power and rewards will be capped accordingly to prevent governance distortions.
  • Any excess staked tokens beyond the cap will not contribute to voting power or yield staking rewards, incentivizing redelegation.

Conclusion

Introducing a staking cap of 15,000,000 tokens per validator enhances Story L1’s decentralization and security by limiting the maximum control any single entity can exert over the network. This proposal aligns with best practices in Proof-of-Stake networks, reducing network centralization risks while maintaining a robust and secure validator set.

56 Likes
2

We can set a max cap per node but we need to adjust from time to time given the total number of tokens changes and more interest would be to stake over time. Another alternative if we don’t want to enforce the max limit on the token is to consider each validator has a single vote (fixed weight during consensus), this way we prevent attacks and we don’t need to worry about distribution of tokens between validators (as long as they have the min)

17 Likes
3

Fixed weight has another risk, that smaller validators can collude easily in this case, unless we also have a higher bar of minimum stakes.

21 Likes
4

Great proposal! The introduction of a staking cap per validator is a solid step toward improving decentralization and mitigating centralization risks in Story L1. The outlined enforcement mechanism and migration plan ensure a smooth transition while keeping governance fair and resilient.

A few considerations that might be worth discussing:

– Since staking participation can fluctuate over time, should there be a mechanism to periodically reassess and adjust the cap based on network conditions?
– Will this cap encourage more validators to enter the ecosystem, or might it deter larger stakeholders from participating? It could be useful to monitor how validator distribution changes post-implementation.
– The proposal mentions redelegating excess stakes, but what happens if validators don’t comply within the grace period? Would an automated enforcement (such as stake slashing or forced redelegation) be considered?

Overall, I support this direction as it aligns with best practices in Proof-of-Stake networks. Looking forward to hearing more insights from the community!

15 Likes
5

Thanks for this great proposal!
I believe that making our network more decentralized is crucial for enhancing its maturity and security.

In fact, a similar discussion took place in Cosmos in the past (#3629). However, it seems that no actual development has been carried out after that.

Setting a maximum delegation per validator can prevent too many tokens from being delegated to a single validator from an account-wise perspective, thereby avoiding centralization around specific validators. However, from an entity-wise perspective, a delegation max cap does not seem to address the fundamental issue. With the max cap of delegation per validator, an entity seeking to receive more delegations could simply create additional validator accounts to bypass the limit. In such a case, the entity would effectively operate multiple validators with voting power exceeding the max cap and prevent other validators to be included in active validator set.

23 Likes
7

nice proposal lfg hyped

11 Likes
8

Suprb team feb gonna rock with IP

9 Likes
9

Sounds good! The 15M token cap is a solid way to prevent stake centralization while keeping flexibility for delegators. The enforcement approach makes sense and should help maintain a more decentralized and secure network. We’re on board!

2 Likes