Rewards burning

Currently, due to the locked rewards logic, withdrawing delegation/validator means that (A) previous rewards get burnt. It also means that (B) if validator has withdrawn or was pruned for being offline, then delegator has only 2 choices:

1. Wait until rewards are unlocked to receive previous rewards. Since validator isn't active, delegator won't receive new rewards anymore. Withdraw after rewards are claimed.
2. Withdraw right away and re-delegate to another validator. Then not claimed rewards are burnt.

Property (B) is clearly not fair to delegators.

There's a proposal on how we may get rid of property (B), with 2 variations.

We should allow to claim rewards any time (as if rewards were unlocked), but claimed rewards won't be directly transferred on user's account. Instead, claimed rewards will be held by SFC contract, and can be transferred by a rewards owner only when rewards are unlocked.

There're 2 variations:

1. Claimed rewards can be transferred even if delegator/validator has withdrawn. This way, there'll be no properties (A) and (B) anymore.
2. During delegator/validator withdrawal, claimed rewards get burnt. For delegator, if validator has deactivated already or was pruned, then rewards aren't burnt. During partial delegator/validator withdrawal, proportional part of claimed rewards gets burnt. This way, we'll preserve property (A) but not property (B).

During delegator/validator withdrawal, claimed rewards get burnt. For delegator, if validator has deactivated already or was pruned, then rewards aren't burnt. During partial delegator/validator withdrawal, proportional part of claimed rewards gets burnt. This way, we'll preserve property (A) but not property (B).

This variation sounds more favourable.

Does this also allow for people to re-delegate regardless if a validator has been inactive or pruned? So to enable people re-delegating their tokens to another validator if they want to. In this case they would not withdraw their delegation and then create a new one, but kinda call a "re-delegate" function to just switch to another validator.

Does this also allow for people to re-delegate regardless if a validator has been inactive or pruned? So to enable people re-delegating their tokens to another validator if they want to. In this case they would not withdraw their delegation and then create a new one, but kinda call a "re-delegate" function to just switch to another validator.

Unfortunately it won't be secure. There always must be a lock period (currently max(7 days, 3 epochs)) during any stake decreasing (if re-delegated from validator A to validator B, then A's stake has decreased), as a waiting for a possible doublesign which was done in past epochs but was revealed only after deactivation/pruning.

Technically there can be a "re-delegate" call, but it would have the same lock period, so it would work the same as withdraw their delegation and then create a new one

Technically there can be a "re-delegate" call, but it would have the same lock period, so it would work the same as withdraw their delegation and then create a new one

alright, got it.

@MKong mentioned that we should implement the second variation:

During delegator/validator withdrawal, claimed rewards get burnt. For delegator, if validator has deactivated already or was pruned, then rewards aren't burnt. During partial delegator/validator withdrawal, proportional part of claimed rewards gets burnt. This way, we'll preserve property (A) but not property (B).