[Discussion] Validator Centralization / Block Proposer Reward

Problem: As pointed out on reddit the voting power is currently quite centralized to a few validators, which should be a concern since most users are lazy and won’t change their vote easily. Additionally, I think the current system even encourages validator centralization: On the one hand a 1% to 5% reward bonus is given to the validator that proposes each block. On the other hand, the more stake, that a validator has delegated to them, the more weight that they have, and the proportionally more times they will be elected as block proposer. If every validator would charge the same fee, a homo economicus would always select the validator with the most votes, since this validator has a higher chance of getting the reward bonus. It can be argued that validators don’t charge the same fee. However, in reality even without this reward bonus it’s highly likely that a validator centralization takes place in the long run (see almost every other economic system) and the reward bonus only encourages this even further. Ideas: A rough idea would be to instead of the block proposer reward to introduce a block proposer punishment depending on the precommits. This means the more blocks…

Excerpt (1198 of 2056 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

Thank you for sharing your idea, @Noc2!
I could relate to your concern on cosmos voting power being extremely centralized. At the same time, I feel that the solution proposed introduces major changes to the elegant consensus algorithm we all love. All feelings aside, the network economics suggested hasn’t been modeled or tested. It could also lead to a constant redelegation race among delegators…
It is still entirely possible that somebody creates new blockchain application based on your suggestion.