CS gives more freedom and possiblities to SPOs, while not creating more risks for regulations of the protocol. CS in itself cannot enable KYC or AML as transactions are still permissionless. At best it could limit delegation but would not be an efficent way of regulation, and you are free to delegate elsewhere or start up your own pool.

Question

Answer

Con: It creates a competitive advance against the individual and will eventually limit delegation.

Answer

Pro: Stake pools that have enabled Contingent Staking may be distinguishable, allowing delegators to make an informed decision on where to delegate their stake without needing to go through extra procedures.

Answer

Con: Introducing additional stages in the delegation process creates a cumbersome experience.

Cardano Contingent Staking

Pros

Cons

Stake pools that have enabled Contingent Staking may be distinguishable, allowing delegators to make an informed decision on where to delegate their stake without needing to go through extra procedures.

Introducing additional stages in the delegation process creates a cumbersome experience.

It creates a competitive advance against the individual and will eventually limit delegation.

Selected claim, supporting its parent

Pro claim 1

Stake pools that have enabled Contingent Staking may be distinguishable, allowing delegators to make an informed decision on where to delegate their stake without needing to go through extra procedures.

Con claim 1

Introducing additional stages in the delegation process creates a cumbersome experience.

Con claim 2

It creates a competitive advance against the individual and will eventually limit delegation.