DUSK's node staking system is quite interesting, adopting a tiered incentive scheme to encourage more people to participate in network maintenance. In simple terms, the more DUSK you lock up, the higher your share of the rewards.
Specifically, for nodes staking 100,000 tokens, the fee sharing can be increased to 1.2 times; if staking exceeds 500,000 tokens, you can also receive a monthly subsidy from the ecosystem development fund. This design clearly aims to attract more capable participants to operate high-quality nodes long-term.
However, staking doesn't guarantee stability. The system has clear requirements for node uptime—if the online rate drops below 95%, a penalty of 10% of the rewards will be applied. This move is quite strict, pushing each operator to maintain stable network connections and operational standards. After all, network consensus efficiency depends on all participants taking it seriously.
This combination of incentives—rewards plus penalties—can indeed strike a balance between motivation and constraint, ensuring the healthy operation of the node ecosystem.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
LiquidityOracle
· 9h ago
You need 500,000 tokens to receive the subsidy, which is indeed a high threshold.
---
The penalty for 95% online rate causes operational costs to skyrocket.
---
The ladder incentive scheme is indeed sophisticated; it all depends on who can withstand the 95% requirement.
---
The more you stake, the higher the returns, but the risks also increase. Not everyone can afford to play this game.
---
The ecological development fund sounds good, but the specifics of the monthly subsidy depend on actual implementation.
---
Deducting 10% of rewards is a method that can push operators to maintain good nodes.
---
Imagine a node operator losing 10% because of network jitter causing disconnection—that would be very frustrating.
---
Those with strength will come, and those without shouldn't force it. That's probably what DUSK aims for.
---
It seems this design is meant to filter out serious participants, while those who are not will be eliminated.
---
Starting with 500,000 DUSK is necessary to access the best rewards; it's definitely not for ordinary users.
View OriginalReply0
0xLuckbox
· 9h ago
You need to start with at least 500,000 to qualify for the ecosystem fund subsidy. This threshold is a bit tough. How can small retail investors play?
View OriginalReply0
FUDwatcher
· 9h ago
A minimum of 500,000 tokens is required to receive the ecological subsidy, which is indeed a high threshold.
---
A 95% online rate can easily lead to a 10% drop in returns. This penalty mechanism is quite harsh.
---
By the way, this design seems to favor the richer the more they can earn. Can small retail investors really get involved?
---
The combined attack works pretty well, but the key still depends on how the actual participation at each node will turn out.
---
The more you stake, the more you earn. Everyone understands this logic, but we're just worried it might be another seemingly good plan.
---
The 95% online rate threshold is a bit restrictive, and operational costs need to be considered as well.
---
The tiered incentive system is okay; at least it doesn't have an absolutely unfair setup.
DUSK's node staking system is quite interesting, adopting a tiered incentive scheme to encourage more people to participate in network maintenance. In simple terms, the more DUSK you lock up, the higher your share of the rewards.
Specifically, for nodes staking 100,000 tokens, the fee sharing can be increased to 1.2 times; if staking exceeds 500,000 tokens, you can also receive a monthly subsidy from the ecosystem development fund. This design clearly aims to attract more capable participants to operate high-quality nodes long-term.
However, staking doesn't guarantee stability. The system has clear requirements for node uptime—if the online rate drops below 95%, a penalty of 10% of the rewards will be applied. This move is quite strict, pushing each operator to maintain stable network connections and operational standards. After all, network consensus efficiency depends on all participants taking it seriously.
This combination of incentives—rewards plus penalties—can indeed strike a balance between motivation and constraint, ensuring the healthy operation of the node ecosystem.