The choice to make delegation a right to all ADA holders is not the best for business but it’s the best for the humans the system was built for. If we are going to make a new financial system for the future it must be predicted on principles like equity and access. CS will disenfranchise some members of our ecosystem.

Question

Answer

Con: Contingent staking does not disenfranchise anyone. Where is the fear that all pools will restrict access coming from? SPO’s want your delegation and those that don’t restrict access will always have an advantage over those that do. Just like a web site that requires a login has fewer visitors than one that doesn’t.

Answer

Con: This post supposes that Delegation is the same as Block Production. This is not true. Block production remains permissionless. The right to Delegate is to become permissioned. There is no equity/access deniability here, well, ONLY if they want to access the specialised SPO service they're told NO for; which is the point!

Answer

Con: The competition of Permissionless SPO's should out weigh those that require permissioned entry for specific services of SPO's that enact it.

Answer

Con: you are making the assumption that delegators will lose the right to delegate which is simply not true. moreover you are forcing your pov on both validators and delegators by limiting options. if equity and access are the goals then surely the conditions by which they have access must vary. forced uniformity is not choice nor freedom.

Answer

Con: Every decision a business makes is disenfranchising some people for their customer base. Equity does not exist and will never exist, it is awesome in theory but you cannot build a system on this principal.

Answer

Con: The right to delegate to any pool should not be a 'thing'. An SPO will setup a pool based on their needs to deliver a service (whether basic staking or enhanced), they will have requirements to meet, therefore need the potential to restrict access.

Answer

Pro: People strech the association of the SPO with its own delegators to justify their arguments. But you are correct. Stake is a right because it is needed by the protocol to work propertly. Adding restrictions to that right based on morals is questionable. Specially if forcing moral upon others (SPO) is real-world possibility (it is).

Cardano Contingent Staking

Pros

Cons

Every decision a business makes is disenfranchising some people for their customer base. Equity does not exist and will never exist, it is awesome in theory but you cannot build a system on this principal.

The right to delegate to any pool should not be a 'thing'. An SPO will setup a pool based on their needs to deliver a service (whether basic staking or enhanced), they will have requirements to meet, therefore need the potential to restrict access.

The competition of Permissionless SPO's should out weigh those that require permissioned entry for specific services of SPO's that enact it.

Selected claim, opposing its parent

Pro claim 1

Con claim 1

Every decision a business makes is disenfranchising some people for their customer base. Equity does not exist and will never exist, it is awesome in theory but you cannot build a system on this principal.

Con claim 2

Con claim 3

The right to delegate to any pool should not be a 'thing'. An SPO will setup a pool based on their needs to deliver a service (whether basic staking or enhanced), they will have requirements to meet, therefore need the potential to restrict access.

Con claim 4

The competition of Permissionless SPO's should out weigh those that require permissioned entry for specific services of SPO's that enact it.

Con claim 5

Con claim 6