Staking Discussion - Validator / Delegator Node Concept

I wanted introduced the concept of creating validator nodes / staking delegation for open discussion. This would use a single asset stake pool structure to delegate your voting power to a representative of your choosing. You would need some amount of MFT like 10m MFT (pre-swap) to set up a validator / delegation node. You could then get up to 10x your MFT staked as a delegation limit to your validator node as a cap to your voting power. You can also set the node premium (e.g., 2%, 5%, etc) for providing these services to others. This pool can then be used for various services including guarantor bot liquidity, liquidity lending for the team, or for insurance liquidity. Example: To tier risk, maybe the single asset staking validator/delegator structure could be set up as low risk return of maybe 10%, which would be allocated to run a node with limited risk. So if a delegator delegates to a node then they get 10% less the premium paid to the validator…so maybe 8% if the premium is 2%. The validator gets their 10% plus the 2% from each delegation against their staked MFT. For the delegator, that returns 8% as basically passive income and the validators cover voting for them. By contrast, a delegator could also stake in an LP pool. This gets you maybe 20%, a slightly higher return after tax effect but comes with additional risk.

We could use Sablier to stream delegation and validator returns assuming all responsibilities are covered. We could also use Sablier to stream lending repayment or insurance payment, even if it is released into escrow prior to being released to the validator or delegator.

Using a third party service like allnodes would help reduce downtime of nodes. I’m sure there is a network effect for transactions that nodes could also support for Hifi but that might not be needed as currently structure on ETH. Maybe if Hifi ever becomes a separate protocol or a multichain protocol.


Finally got a chance to look at this. It combines a few new ideas and a few existing ones and seems to central around nodes, but the nodes are just representatives who vote on your behalf (so you don’t have to) and by doing so they take a cut. Its an interesting concept and I wish there were more responses to this as i’d like to see it explored further via critique.

I love how creative it is, offering a Governance as a Service for HiFi holders.

1 Like

What would be the pros and cons of the validator nodes model?
Any other risks involved in your experience?
What will be the mechanism to determine the cap for voting power to avoid bad actors taking control of the proposals?

1 Like

The idea of implementing or offering a Governance as a service might have other legal implications that might need to be covered.