 I think 10% is too low. Pools will be the only way the little guys can get rewards and this only seems to benefit the whales. I would consider a limit at 25%

[@kGh5...FmLi](kGh5Dg1VA6v3sNh4ZeHBRJez7fQikU3maG8jxxFHAfd49FmLi-vara) Hi. Could you tell more? Why do you think that 25%, which is a large commission, would benefit the pool members?

[@kGh5...FmLi](kGh5Dg1VA6v3sNh4ZeHBRJez7fQikU3maG8jxxFHAfd49FmLi-vara) 10% is fair commission. Using the pool should't be a robbery

[@ukint-vs](kGgQqLXhVVMv85XDy1v5AE6HVBG1tkAwURrdmq1ewbmGMCaGH-vara) This is a cap meaning that if the pool staked a majority of the total tokens on a validator it could only recieve 10%. The initial bond for a validator is already 100k tokens and to get into the top 55 the validator has to have about 55M tokens. This means that only the whales will benefit and if we limit the commision to pools, the smaller investors will take their money somewhere else. Do we want to have a decentralized ecosystem or one ran by the whales? I also agree with some the 50 tokens to start a pool is quite low and should be raised. 

I think 10% as a commission cap is fair. With a current minimum requirement of only 50 VARA for pool creation, high fee caps wouldn't serve to benefit anyone. If it were much more difficult or costly to create a pool, then scaling up the fee would make more sense, in my opinion. 

[@kGiY...vfcZ](kGiYBSBxLHfduoLqx2qUy9VnzDXvuyQu1kgjKg1kF62ozvfcZ-vara) There is already a cap of the number of nominators that can recieve rewards, being the top 256. While the chain is still new we don't see any issues becuase the validators are not full yet. There is also a limit to how many contributors can join a pool. Now we are going to limit the pool, that is not that easy to grow btw to only 10%. What if the pool makes up 50% of the nominators for that validator? If they leave the validator will go inactive and it will only leave the nominators that have millions to spend.

Sorry everyone, I totally misuderstood the purpose behind the vote. After some chats in discord I discovered the actual implications of the referendum. I did not realize this was a commission for the pool owner. I instead thought it was a cap on the total rewards for the pool itself. I would suggest more elaborate explanations on future votes.

Nomination Pools set max commission to 10%

call

Executed

Submitted

DecisionStarted

DecisionDepositPlaced

ConfirmStarted

Confirmed

whitelisted_caller

[Whitelisted Caller] Referendum #12 Nomination Pools set max commission to 10%

candidates

members

proficients