{"@context":{"CIP100":"https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#","hashAlgorithm":"CIP100:hashAlgorithm","body":{"@id":"CIP100:body","@context":{"comment":"CIP100:comment"}}},"hashAlgorithm":"blake2b-256","body":{"comment":"Imagine two Cardanos.\n\nCardano A has 100 highly efficient professional operators.\n\nCardano B has 1,000 geographically, politically and organizationally independent operators, even if some of them are less efficient or simply different.\n\nA may look better from a narrow efficiency perspective. I still prefer B. Redundancy and resilience have value - especially in complex networks. Apparent efficiency can  mask tail risk.\n\nIf the 170 ADA minPoolCost puts smaller pools at a structural disadvantage and pushes delegation towards larger operators, reducing it to 75 ADA is reasonable. It does not guarantee greater decentralization, but it removes some of the pressure working against it.\n\nI understand there are economic realities for every SPO.  Reducing minPoolCost potentially reduces operator income. I support 75 ADA as an incremental step. My support for 75 ADA should not be read as support for any particular future change to SPO parameters.\n\nEssentially, I am willing to accept some inefficiency in exchange for greater resilience. Cardano does not need maximum efficiency if greater concentration leads to a system that may prove to be more fragile when unexpected threats emerge."}}