Feature request - Self Limit notice on staking pools

[SnapCrackle2383]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Making users aware that a healthy ecosystem has a balanced share of staked ETH is worth highlighting to users so they can make an informed choice.

Rocketpool, Stakewise etc have all committed to not grow above a 22% market share.

Describe the solution you'd like

Add a self-limit tick to protocols that have voted on not growing past 22% Add a self-limit cross for those above this self-limit

Describe alternatives you've considered

I can't think of a better way to build awareness on the e.org site about this.

Additional context

Adding something like this is a strong social signal and a reminder to those staking pools.

Would you like to work on this issue?

• [X] Yes
• [ ] No

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity.

[SnapCrackle2383]

@wackerow This was a mention from a staking pool. Do you think its worth including in the checklist?

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity.

[wackerow]

Hey @SnapCrackle2383... I do agree we need to expand our efforts in educating around this topic.

Add a self-limit tick to protocols that have voted on not growing past 22% Add a self-limit cross for those above this self-limit

This would really act as a social/cultural indicator. I wouldn't necessarily be against providing something similar to staking.directory where it's framed as a "Self-limit Pledge", with a description of what that means.

At the same time, it would be great to use network data to paint a picture of network dominance (as best as possible) for each project, and educate users on the risks of supporting projects at/near certain thresholds, ie 33% or worse.

@nloureiro @konopkja Curious if either of you have thoughts from a design perspective on how we could iterate on our existing design to incorporate something like this... or if you'd foresee a larger makeover to these product listings.

@minimalsm @jmcook1186 and others, curious your takes on including this type of indicator

[konopkja]

Hey @SnapCrackle2383... I do agree we need to expand our efforts in educating around this topic.

Add a self-limit tick to protocols that have voted on not growing past 22% Add a self-limit cross for those above this self-limit

This would really act as a social/cultural indicator. I wouldn't necessarily be against providing something similar to staking.directory where it's framed as a "Self-limit Pledge", with a description of what that means.

At the same time, it would be great to use network data to paint a picture of network dominance (as best as possible) for each project, and educate users on the risks of supporting projects at/near certain thresholds, ie 33% or worse.

@nloureiro @konopkja Curious if either of you have thoughts from a design perspective on how we could iterate on our existing design to incorporate something like this... or if you'd foresee a larger makeover to these product listings.

@minimalsm @jmcook1186 and others, curious your takes on including this type of indicator

maybe inside the card it should be as warning or another criterion inside the card "ecosystem diversity" since we already have criteria around infra diversity (execution/consensus diversity)

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.

[wackerow]

I'm good with trying to move forward on this. @SnapCrackle2383 Is there any place where this data is already collected, or would we need to obtain this?

[SnapCrackle2383]

I don't know of anywhere other than each individual pool. Stakewise / Rocketpool have it, not sure who else. Do you want me to ask a few to populate it?

On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 at 01:37, Paul Wackerow @.***> wrote:

Assigned #10381 https://github.com/ethereum/ethereum-org-website/issues/10381 to @SnapCrackle2383 https://github.com/SnapCrackle2383.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethereum/ethereum-org-website/issues/10381#event-13108608997, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AYIXOAOEHFXE4VMNVVKEZG3ZGY2FNAVCNFSM6AAAAAAY4FUB4OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABCJFZXG5LFIV3GK3TUJZXXI2LGNFRWC5DJN5XDWMJTGEYDQNRQHA4TSNY . You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID: @.*** com>

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.

[wackerow]

Hey @SnapCrackle2383! Just circling through. My main concern with this is maintainability amongst the different projects, otherwise I think it'd be a great thing to list. Any thoughts on how we'd like to move forward with this?

[SnapCrackle2383]

I think most projects state a figure (e.g 22%) and they would take years to approach that figure so fairly easy for them to maintain?

If it’s something we could add, the next step we could ask all existing listed pools to add in their publicly committed stake limit?

On Tue 27. Aug 2024 at 17:14, Paul Wackerow @.***> wrote:

Hey @SnapCrackle2383 https://github.com/SnapCrackle2383! Just circling through. My main concern with this is maintainability amongst the different projects, otherwise I think it'd be a great thing to list. Any thoughts on how we'd like to move forward with this?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethereum/ethereum-org-website/issues/10381#issuecomment-2312845115, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AYIXOAPGI4JMWRKS3ILQORDZTSJXFAVCNFSM6AAAAAAY4FUB4OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMJSHA2DKMJRGU . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.