To see the FAQs head over to this article on our blog.
Atlas proposed a major quality‑of‑life upgrade for IP stakers. A new governance proposal, SIP‑00010: Reducing Staking Threshold, would cut minimum staking amounts and reward thresholds by more than 90%!. It will drastically reduce fees by 90% as well. This is a big deal for anyone who holds IP and wants to participate in securing the network without needing thousands of tokens.
In this post we’ll walk through SIP‑00010, what it changes, and what it means for you as an IP holder, delegator, and for validators on Story.
What SIP‑00010 actually changes
SIP‑00010 focuses on three main levers for IP token staking:
-
The minimum size of stake/unstake/redelegate transactions.
-
The minimum amount of rewards that must accumulate before they are automatically distributed.
-
The fees charged for staking transactions.
1. MINIMUM STAKE, UNSTAKE, AND REDELEGATE AMOUNTS
Right now, Story requires a minimum of 1024 IP for three core actions:
-
Staking IP.
-
Unstaking IP.
-
Redelegating IP from one validator to another.
WHY THE STAKING MINIMUM MATTERS
In our initial forum proposal we point out how this minimum prevents the average Joe from participating, prevents validators from growing stake, and thus prevents the network from being more secure. The community agreed and the Story team listened!
SIP‑00010 proposes to reduce that floor from 1024 IP to 32 IP for all three actions:
-
Minimum stake amount: 1024 IP → 32 IP.
-
Minimum unstake amount: 1024 IP → 32 IP.
-
Minimum redelegate amount: 1024 IP → 32 IP.
In other words, instead of needing a four‑figure IP balance to do anything meaningful with staking, you’d be able to move in 32 IP chunks.
2. Minimum reward distribution threshold
Today, rewards are automatically distributed only when a delegator’s accumulated rewards reach 8 IP. If you have a small stake, it can take a long time to hit that 8 IP threshold and see anything show up in your wallet.
SIP‑00010 proposes to reduce this auto‑distribution threshold from 8 IP to 1 IP:
-
Auto‑reward distribution threshold: 8 IP → 1 IP.
-
The distribution queue capacity (32 delegators per block) stays the same.
The protocol will still batch reward distributions to protect performance, but it will now “flush” rewards much more often for small holders.
WHY THE REWARD MINIMUM MATTERS
-
With a 1 IP threshold, smaller delegations will see rewards land much more frequently, which makes staking feel real instead of purely theoretical. Many stake because they need the income and this provides those people with cash flow.
-
You still receive all accrued rewards when you unstake, so nobody was “losing” rewards before, but this change dramatically improves the user experience day‑to‑day.
3. Staking operation fees
Story currently charges a 1 IP fee for a range of staking‑related operations. On a percentage basis, that’s a substantial amount when you’re dealing with smaller positions.
SIP‑00010 proposes to reduce the fee for all of these to 0.1 IP:
-
Stake
-
Claim rewards
-
Redelegate
-
Unstake
Each of these operations would go down from costing 1 IP to 0.1 IP.
WHY STAKING FEES MATTER
-
For active stakers 1 IP per operation adds up quickly.
-
Dropping fees to 0.1 IP makes normal maintenance and risk management affordable, especially once the 32 IP minimums are in place.
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR SMALL & MID-SIZE IP HOLDERS
If you’re a smaller IP holder or still accumulating a position, SIP‑00010 changes your life more than anyone else’s.
YOU NO LONGER NEED A FOUR-FIGURE IP BALANCE TO PARTICIPATE
With a 32 IP minimum:
-
You can start staking much earlier instead of waiting until you hit 1024 IP.
-
You can redelegate gradually from one validator to another instead of “all or nothing.”
-
You can test the system with a small delegation first, then scale up as you gain confidence.
This kind of granularity is critical for retail‑sized users who can’t or won’t put thousands of IP to work in a single transaction.
REWARDS FEEL REAL SOONER
Lowering the reward distribution threshold from 8 IP to 1 IP means:
-
You’ll see rewards hit your address more frequently, even with relatively modest stakes.
-
The staking experience looks and feels more like other chains most users are familiar with: you stake, and not too long after, you see rewards.
This is a big UX win, especially for people onboarding into Story from other ecosystems.
MAINTENANCE STOPS FEELING SO EXPENSIVE
When fees for actions like staking more or redelegation are 1 IP:
-
Smaller users might avoid making healthy changes (like leaving a poor‑performing validator) because it “costs too much” to fix.
-
Risk management becomes economically unattractive.
At 0.1 IP per transaction, it reduces the friction between profit and normal portfolio management.
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR VALIDATORS & THE NETWORK
SIP‑00010 isn’t just a gift to stakers. It also has important implications for validators and Story’s long‑term health.
MORE NATURAL GROWTH OF THE DELEGATOR BASE
Lowering the thresholds makes it possible for:
-
More delegators to enter earlier, instead of waiting until they accumulate 1024 IP, which many can’t afford.
-
Validators to grow stake more organically from a broader base, not just a few whales or institutions.
For validators like Atlas, that’s a better foundation: more delegators, more community alignment, fewer single points of failure.
BALANCED AGAINST PERFORMANCE & SPAM RISKS
The team explicitly mentions that they scoped this proposal to things they can change without opening the floodgates to spam or over complicating the system:
-
They did not adopt manual reward claiming at any amount because feeless micro‑claims could be abused, and adding a fee would feel terrible for tiny rewards.
-
They did not implement advanced “guardrails instead of higher minimums” (like rate limits or dust floors) in this SIP because those require extra design and testing; instead, they focused on base thresholds and fees.
That tradeoff is important to keep in mind: SIP‑00010 is intentionally modest and pragmatic. This is a first step toward inclusion. Further improvements can be made down the road.
WHERE ATLAS STANDS ON SIP‑00010
From our perspective, SIP‑00010 is a major step in the right direction for Story’s staking UX.
-
It dramatically lowers the barrier for smaller IP holders to start staking and getting paid to help secure the network.
-
It makes reward flows feel more tangible by dropping the distribution threshold to 1 IP.
-
It makes routine operations affordable, so people can safely manage risk and move their stake between validators.
We’ve been vocal in governance discussions about wanting even more accessibility and better compounding for small stakers. We’d like to see the minimum removed to add IP to one’s initial stake. We feel this allows people to compound their returns which increases network security, while still eliminating spam because of the initial 32 IP staking requirement.
Our stance is simple:
-
Support SIP‑00010 now as a clear, high‑impact improvement for today’s users.
-
If the proposal can be adjusted to remove the restaking minimum, sweet! That allows the bonded ratio (outstanding token supply that’s staked) to grow quicker.
-
Continue to explore, with the community and Story team, how to make staking and compounding even more friendly for smaller IP holders in follow‑up upgrades.
In the meantime, Atlas will keep:
-
Running a reliable Story validator aimed at long‑term alignment with the protocol.
-
Publishing clear, no‑nonsense explanations of governance changes like SIP‑00010 so you don’t have to parse every forum thread yourself.
-
Helping delegators understand how to participate in staking and the ecosystem as a whole.
To reiterate, we are absolutely voting YES on SIP-00010 in its current form. The Story team is fantastic for being open-minded, listening to the community, and proposing a realistic change that improves the UX and chain security. Bravo @jack-story and team! This post is in no way meant to derail their efforts. Zero disrespect intended.
Our post is only meant to start conversation on what we think is a material improvement to SIP-00010. If you have any comments or thoughts about our idea to remove the restaking minimum, we would certainly love to start a conversation below in the comments.
