Am I still SOL on the node that can no longer be community staked?

Continuing the discussion from Rent required stake for pnode:

P.S. I like how it was never “community” staked to begin with. The funds were allocated by the team, not the “community”. Shame.

Provide section is community staked.

1 Like

Then why can’t I restake my node? It’s because the team doesn’t have the funds to restake it. The team allotted 1750PRV for each sold pNode initially. Now, who knows. “Community” lul

My understanding is that Incog gave every pnode user 1750 PRV to stake their node upfront so they didn’t have to stake it themselves. In return, it was a 35/65 split on the earnings. Once the user earned their own 1750 PRV, they could unstake it and claim all the earnings. Early on, they were being nice by restaking people’s nodes if they accidentally unstaked them without knowing what they were doing. Ultimately, people were abusing the complimentary service they were providing. And, like all “this is why we can’t have nice things”, they ultimately stopped doing it altogether once the sale of pnodes ended. Many users have been saying that restaking was always promised, when, in fact, it wasn’t. Support chose to do that voluntarily. Pnode users who chose to unstake their nodes on their own can still use them. They just need to provide the same funds every vnode owner has had to do up front from the beginning. To my knowledge, Incog has not pulled any funds from any pnode owners that have their nodes funded with their original stake. Only those who chose to unstake their devices. Or, another way to look at it would be like someone voiding their warranty.

1 Like

So “community” staking was a lie. It was always “team” staking. I like how you call it “abuse”. I figured since it was “community” staking, I could join the “community” staking pool if I ever decided that staking with my own PRV wasn’t viable anymore. Which is what I did after the surprise, vague slashing announcement was made and staking one’s own PRV was not economically viable given the slashing risk. The fact that people call that “abuse” is fucking disgusting. What a permissioned joke of a project this is and, truth be told, always was.

I mean, I don’t know where you saw the words community staking, so I cant answer to that. My understanding is that pnodes have never been community staked. But there is in fact community staking. That is exactly what the provide section is. Everyone puts their PRV in there, and Incog runs physical nodes with it. The rewards earned from them are used to pay the APY on a steady hourly basis. This was created to allow people who didnt want to buy a pnode or run a vnode a way to still earn rewards. Or, those who wanted more consistent returns since node selection is random.


No. Definitively no. There has never been an option for “‘community’ staking”. Not for funding a Physical Node, pNode, Node Device, Virtual Node, vNode, Node Virtual or any other term you may want to use to describe an Incognito Node. Something that does not and has never existed cannot be a lie.

Correct. This was also never a secret. The PRV in each Funded Stake was provided by the Incognito Team to ease technical and financial requirements for less technical users. This was the case since the inception of the Nodes, even before the Incogntio genesis block.

Again there has never been a “‘community’ staking” option for any Incognito Node. The only two options that have ever existed for the PRV stake of a pNode have been the Funded Stake and the Private Stake. That’s it.

The Funded Stake has been provided on every pNode shipped by Incognito. It was impossible to obtain a pNode from Incognito without a Funded Stake. It was also impossible to obtain a Funded Stake for use with a vNode. Therefore Funded Stakes have only ever been available with a pNode shipped from Incognito.

The only way to privately stake a pNode is to first unstake the Funded Stake and second provide a private stake of 1750 PRV. Unstaking (with the intent to privately stake) was not even an option until early Q2 of 2020, well after the genesis block in October 2019.

There was no vague or surprise slashing announcement. Slashing has always been on the published roadmap for Incognito.

Incognito will not, and has never had, plans to use a financial slashing penalty. Slashing will only forcibly unstake a Node.

For vNodes and pNodes with a Private Stake, the 1750 PRV stake is returned to operator’s wallet. In other words, you get your PRV back if your Node is slashed. All of your 1750 PRV stake.

For pNodes with a Funded Stake, the 1750 PRV is returned to the Incognito Team. The PRV in the Funded Stake was never owned by a pNode operator. Were that not the case, it would have been highly profitable to simply buy pNodes for $399 and immediately unstake them to obtain the 1750 PRV of the stake. That would be worth far more than the $399 cost of the hardware.

But that has never been the case. The Incognito Team, being the owners of the origin wallet for each Funded Stake, are therefore the owners of each Funded Stake. Thus just like vNodes and privately staked pNodes, the 1750 PRV stake of a pNode with a Funded Stake is returned to the owner of the stake – the Incognito Team.

Any PRV earned by a Node is and always remains under your control, even in the case of a slashed Node. Slashing has no impact on any PRV you own.

Therefore your PRV was not, is not and never will be at risk due to a slashing event. As designed from the outset of the project. Full stop.

What is being termed “‘abuse’” was the somewhat rampant overuse of a niche service extended to a small subset of the community of pNode operators. The ability to restore a Funded Stake to an unstaked pNode was provided as a courtesy for a few accidental, edge cases. But it was used by some community members to also transfer ownership of a pNode. Neither use was an intended feature of Incognito.

The support team, developers and other Incognito team members allowed restaking to extend far beyond that courtesy scope until the community was misusing, abusing it to such a degree that it compromised developer resources for the core project.