Key Highlights
- Polkadot introduced OpenGov Referenda #1909 and #1910 to overhaul staking mechanics.
- The proposals aim to improve validator accountability and reduce risks for nominators.
- Validators would receive stronger incentives to increase self-stake holdings.
Polkadot, a decentralized blockchain, today introduced two new governance proposals under its OpenGov system that could reshape the network’s staking mechanics. Referenda #1909 and #1910 aim to strengthen validator incentives, reduce risks for nominators, and lower security costs while maintaining network protection.
According to the official update, the proposals focus on rebalancing responsibilities between validators and nominators. They build upon a previously approved minimum self-stake requirement of 10,000 DOT for validators, introduced to ensure validators have sufficient “skin in the game.”
Referendum #1909 focuses on validator accountability
The first proposal introduces several changes to validator economics and operations. It allocates the DAP (likely the staking rewards budget) as follows: 45.2% for general staker rewards, 22.6% specifically for validator self-stake incentives, and 32.2% as a buffer.
Validators would be encouraged to increase their own stake through a proportional reward system based on a concave weight function, designed to prevent concentration among a few large stakers.
Additionally, validator commission will be set to 0%, shifting rewards toward self-stake rather than fees taken from nominators. The proposal also lowers the chill threshold to 32%, allowing permissionless chilling of validators who fall below the minimum self-stake requirement. A safety floor will protect the minimum size of the active validator set.
Referendum #1910 targets nominator experience
The second referendum focuses on nominators. It proposes removing the slashing risk for nominators entirely and reducing the unbonding period from approximately 28 days to just two days. These changes would take effect only after the validator set has adapted to the new self-stake requirements from the first proposal.
According to the reasoning behind the changes, once validators maintain meaningful self-stake and bear direct slashing risk, the need to expose nominators to slashing diminishes. Removing this risk and shortening the unbonding period is expected to make staking more attractive and user-friendly for nominators.
Potential negative impact of Polkadot’s staking proposals
The proposed changes carry several risks. Raising the validator self-stake requirement to 10,000 DOT could exclude smaller operators, leading to greater centralization as only well-capitalized entities dominate validation. Zero-commission rules combined with self-stake incentives may reduce overall validator profitability, discouraging participation and potentially shrinking the active set, which weakens network security.
Removing slashing risk for nominators might encourage reckless nominating behavior and reduce market discipline. The shortened unbonding period (to 2 days) could increase staking volatility and sudden capital outflows during market stress.
If validators fail to adapt quickly, phased implementation may create temporary instability, reduced staking participation, and downward pressure on DOT’s price and network trust.
Community voting underway
Both referenda are currently open for community voting through Polkadot’s OpenGov governance system. If approved, implementation would occur in stages, with full activation dependent on validator compliance with the updated self-stake requirements.
The proposals represent one of the most significant staking reforms considered by the network in recent years, as Polkadot continues to refine its validator incentives and staking model.
Also Read: Oobit Integrates Brazil’s PIX to Bring USDT Payments Mainstream
