Jim McDonald

Is it worth attempting to optimize here before withdrawals are implemented, seems a little premature as we don't know how many exited validators there will be. Currently there are 869...

> Can we pipe becon chain block roots to eth1x as well? Would be very useful for applications that depend on beacon chain, like staking pools, which are forced to...

If you're keeping track of the last time that a validator attested then wouldn't it be simpler to just apply the quadratic leak to all validators at all times as...

> We typically want to punish validators if their individual faults have actually led to real safety/liveness problems on chain. This doesn't seem to fit the current slashing punishment. If,...

> I guess the more consistent way to do this would be to always have a quadratic inactivity leak, but make it proportional to the percentage of offline stake. That...

@djrtwo that seems to be attempting to address a different problem than the one @dankrad outlined. From what I can see, yours will increase the inactivity leak in the "10-on-100-off"...

@potuz because there will already be signed voluntary exit transactions out there that would then break. @zah is there any proper use case for this? Given that there are staking...

Not sure about that. If the withdrawal address is a smart contract then who should hold the pre-signed exit transaction?

Sounds like this issue could be solved outside the protocol by the staking service putting up a bond on a smart contract that can be reclaimed by the staking service...

Surely the bond is 32 ETH for each validator, as it allows the stakers to retrieve the funds and go elsewhere. It would only be short-term, as it would not...