Staking UX Opportunities

There’s been lots of discussion in the Discord #delegating channel this week around staking, the role of Livepeer Inc, opportunities for nodes to compete and be rewarded accordingly, etc. Here are a few high level opportunities I see…

  • Ideally stake would move MUCH more frequently and quickly, according to how nodes are contributing to the overall success of Livepeer or change their own parameters/earnings/performance.

  • This requires better “UX” for delegators (including both independent single-account delegators, bigger entities like Livepeer Inc, large institutional delegators or staking operators, etc). What are some UX opportunities?

  • Performance visibility - what capabilities are nodes offering, in what regions, how are they performing, at what scale, and how are they earning as a result? The new AI performance leaderboard coming soon should help with this a bit.

  • Economics monitoring - When do nodes change their reward cut or fee cut params? When do they start and stop earning ETH fees? Have they missed reward calls? The telegram bot certainly can help with this.

  • Multi-delegation management - Many delegators want to diversify and support many nodes. But the UX for this is abysmal because at the moment you can only stake towards one node from one account, queuing and signing multisig txns is a grueling process with no Livepeer-native UX. Deep protocol changes would be required to address the multi-staking, but lots of opportunities are available at the user interface level to better have visiblity into and manage stake across multiple accounts from one dashboard.

  • Awareness - Don’t underestimate the value of a little campaigning. I encourage node operators to make forum posts and continue sharing highlights in their threads of how they’re contributing to the ecosystem. While data is certainly available on chain and in the explorer, it’s hard to proactively parse through grids of numbers and scores that don’t have any time-based history attached, and convert them into staking actions. Are there better opportunities or UX’s to raise awareness of newly participating and high performing nodes? Titan Node’s old “node operator startup program” comes to mind.

  • Access for node operators - There’s been a lot of discussion about raising the limit on node operators beyond 100 to lower the barrier for how much stake is required to join the network. Of course there are potential drawbacks, but the main steps that would need to be taken here are pretty straightforward. 1) Do the quick research and presentation to understand the impact on Gateway deposit requirements. 2) Consider whether or not to introduce Gateway/Orchestrator node config options to let nodes ignore those requirements by default or not. 3) Consider any UX changes to tools that are needed that assume 100 O’s (there may not be any changes required). 4) Make a parameter change LIP proposal.

Ultimately, the role of delegators in Livepeer’s design is meant to be effective at helping the network by quality assuring that high performing nodes are active, have stake, and are appropriately rewarded and funding. One way to do this is by activating high performing, but low stake nodes, onto the network. High performing/low stake nodes earn outsized fees relative to their stake, so rational delegators would move stake towards them. Over time they’d attract more stake, generate more income from their reward cut, and build up their own stakes. Delegators may seek out better economic opportunities by moving stake towards newer, high performing, low stake nodes. The cycle repeats. Doing this requires a really good UX and really good awareness tools, like some mentioned above and more.

These tools are ultimately public goods for the network. The explorer, which serves as the main tool, is a pretty complex piece of software. It gets frequent maintenance, but hasn’t had a dedicated team proactively working to improve it in service of the above delegator experience. We have a framework for using public goods funding through the Livepeer treasury to fix this, and a new “GovWorks” group, working on better facilitating the formation of SPEs and accessing funding to take on these public goods initiatives. So it seems like there’s a clear opportunity here to leverage funding to marshal a committed group to making sure delegation is helping the network achieve success.

3 Likes

My opinion here is to move all manual selection into an advanced tab and completely eliminate choice for the average delegator. The user should be able to click “Stake My LPT”, and the Explorer should be able to identify Orchestrators worth delegating to based on factors listed above and any quantifiable metrics.

Combine this with replacing L1 LPT on CEX’s with L2 LPT and there is 0 friction for any LPT holder than understands what yield farming is, and no reason not to stake.

2 Likes

I am against that “stake my lpt” approach delegators should make their own decison rather than trust any algorithm which some of the orchestrators will always find unfair. Explorer could be intelligent enough to enable staking when connected with mainnet and LPT on there. Incorporating bridging transactions when clicking stake button would be awesome.

1 Like

That’s why you’d have an advanced tab, and a good UI/UX would make that clear. Otherwise, you leave it 100% manual, lose a bunch of delegators (many people don’t want to dig, they want to click and be done), and have people staking to nodes like this one for some reason: Livepeer Explorer (missed several reward calls, doesn’t transcode, and just rugged).

Imo, it’s not about what’s fair to 100* Orchs, but what will bring 1,000’s of delegators to the network, and a good automated system for the average joe will be more fair than expecting them to manually stake based on logical criteria.

If you bring 1000 delegators to the point where they want to stake they will manage to make a choice. They will use current “auto suggestion” and go with highest APY. Making it auto stake to some algo chosen Orchestrator is not a thing which would make them want to stake. Explorer should remain neutral.

Having to choose from 100 orchestrators is not a blocker to stake. There are other blockers which some of em you mentioned.

That Orch just stopped transcoding and disabled itself if he’d rugged he would have raisen reward cut and kept unstaking rewards. It was institutional and they stopped supporting livepeer. It is good that they deactivated.

The only algo I can think off is shuffle and stake to random orch. Otherwise you make it highly subjective and some of orchs might not be happy about that concentration of stake. Explorer is not a place for such subjective algos. You can make your own explorer and make an algo which prefers for example your Orch with auto stake button. I have seen such before arbitrum migration (oh irony… that orchestrator which you mentioned had that implemented lol). Even tenderize has a widget which you can place in your site which enables 1 click stake straight to your orch experience.

The biggest blocker is Lack of L2 support from CEX and low liquidity on arbitrum DEX. This extends unbonding period from 7 days to 14 days in order to include bridging from l2 to l1. Ignorance of delegators is a factor as well if we assume they are not ignorant and do not stake then it means nothing can make them stake cause they have different strategy for the token. They might not be interested in staking for many different reasons so dilution is the only remedy.

1 Like