Since we identified an error in Ref 589 (using perbill instead of perquintill for the inflation parameter, which effectively set inflation near zero), this referendum is a resubmission with the correct parameters. It pre-commits the post-Asset Hub staking inflation settings: maintaining 10% annual inflation with a 75% ideal stake, and disabling parachain slot adjustments by setting UseAuctionSlots = false. The referendum also includes a short on-chain remark clarifying that this is a pre-migration signal, and that the parameters will take effect after migration, with the canary community free to revisit them afterwards.
Moreover, this reduces the maximum number of validator candidates from 4000 to 2500. This is because with the migration of the staking system to AH, the maximum number of validators that the AssetHub can handle cannot be as large of the relay chain, due to PoV constraints. Should the 2500 validator candidacy slots be filled, then validators can compete for the top 2500 slots via chill_other extrinsic, which allows anyone to forcefully chill a validator who has less than minValidatorBond of self-stake. minValidatorBond needs to be set by governance.
Why a vote if numbers don’t change?
Because the execution path changes after the Asset Hub migration. The auctions-dependent branch becomes irrelevant; without an explicit update, the chain could fall back to behavior not explicitly approved for post-AH. This proposal:
- Disables the auctions path by setting (UseAuctionSlots = false)
- Locks in the same headline numbers (10%, 75%) under the right path for AH.
- Voting now blesses the exact post-AH settings (10%, 75%), reduces ambiguity for operators/stakers, and records intent on-chain (remark).
- Signals now (via an on-chain remark) to reduce ambiguity for operators and stakers, and commits to re-evaluate the model after migration.
Why 10% and 75% now?
We’re prioritizing stability through the migration: keeping incentives familiar for validators/nominators and maintaining predictable Treasury dynamics. Changing rates today adds unnecessary risk; we’ll reassess after AH with live data (including options like alternative reward curves or gradual issuance schedules, or decreased inflation …. etc)
What exactly changes on chain?
A batched Root call that:
1- system.remark(...) – documents scope: post-AH signal, no immediate change, revisit after migration.
2- sets Inflation::UseAuctionSlots = false
3- sets Inflation::MaxInflation = perquintill (100_000_000_000_000_000) (10%) & IdealStake remains 75% as is.
Hello @Otar/Polkadot ,
Thank you for the proposal. The rest of the configuration seems in line, but the batch call seems to be missing the
remarkcall, which is listed under "What exactly changes on chain?". Was the remark intended to be included within the batch? It would also be good to include themaxValidatorCountchange under the same section for easy reference.Best,
kukabi | Helikon
Edited