Polkassembly Logo

OpenGov
This proposal was still in progress when Polkassembly was archived. The status shown here is frozen and may not reflect the final on-chain outcome.
View All Whitelisted Caller

Era 2219 Staking Election Stall, incentive-pot redistribution

inWhitelisted Caller
5 days ago
Deciding

On 30 June 2026, the validator election for Era 2220 stalled on Polkadot Asset Hub. Following the enactment of Referendum 1909, permissionless chill_other calls removed 67 under-bonded but heavily nominated validators from the candidate set. This reduced the best achievable election score below the unchanged MinimumScore.minimal_stake threshold. Consequently, every signed and unsigned election solution was rejected with ScoreTooLow, preventing a new validator set from being queued and extending Era 2219 to approximately 3.33 days. Referendum 1914 subsequently lowered the binding score threshold and restored normal era progression. A detailed technical explanation is available in the staking election stall post-mortem.

Although Era 2219 accrued its full emission, it was the transition era for the new validator self-stake incentive mechanism and had zero aggregate incentive weight. Its approximately 115,350 DOT incentive budget therefore cannot be paid through the standard mechanism and would otherwise return to the DAP buffer when Era 2219 is pruned.

This referendum proposes distributing 115,349 DOT from the pallet-owned Era 2219 incentive account directly to the 595 validators that earned non-zero Era 2219 points. The five active validators with zero era points are excluded from payment but remain documented in the audit dataset. Each eligible validator receives an equal allocation through an atomic batch of balances.transferKeepAlive calls dispatched as the incentive-pot account.

The complete rationale, payout schedule, verification procedure and encoded execution call are published in the Era 2219 incentive-pot redistribution technical proposal.

Thans to Paulo for preparing the staking-election stall post-mortem and for helping develop the proposed redistribution approach, and to Ankan for reviewing the solution and providing guidance on the Whitelisted Caller process.

Decoded pre-image call

Comments (2)

3 days ago

My Question is for on behalf of Nominators, are they also getting the part of the rewards or they are not going to get any? If none what is the logic of not including them?

3 days ago

@DW niraivettu

Nominators are now the ones being left behind. They're earning less than 3% APY, while validator revenues have almost doubled. Forget about the crumbs

https://forum.polkadot.network/t/validators-up-85-nominators-down-70-staking-rewards/18098

2 days ago

This referendum is a perfect example of how broken the current ecosystem incentives are.

CoinStudio has become a clear example of the current incentive misalignment in the ecosystem. He has been as a commission flipper has resulted in extracting significant value from nominators.

Also, Coinstudio has been receiving $3,400 as an IBP Bounty curator, while it is still unclear what the actual contribution was, especially considering that explanations were requested and no meaningful response was provided.

Now we have a situation where validators are earning around 85% more than one month ago, while nothing meaningful has changed in their operational costs or hardware requirements. The result is simply a significant increase in profit margins for validators.

At the same time, nominators are receiving around 70% fewer rewards.

And despite this imbalance, you still feel entitled to ask for more?

This is exactly the kind of misalignment that damages trust in the ecosystem.

Polkassembly is now a read-only archive. Commenting is disabled.

Voting Period

Decision Period

4 / 28 days

Confirmation Period

0 / 10 minutes

Help Center

Report an Issue
Feedback
Terms and Conditions
Github

Our Services

Docs
Terms of Website
Privacy Policy

Polkassembly · Archived 2026 · polkassembly.io

Terms and ConditionsTerms of Website
Privacy Policy