[Proposal] Add 5 more validators to the committee during the election #2023-10- A005


The Validator Committee is responsible for block proposing during each epoch. The current number of validators in the Committee is 35 at the moment.


There are 35 validators will be elected during each epoch to participate in block signing. With the MAPO ecosystem getting bigger, more valuable and strong partners would like to join as validators to support the ecosystem’s growth. Hence, the team is proposing to add more validators to the committee during the election. In order to satisfy MAPO security standards, the new MGP-0005 is going to add 5 spots for new validators to join the consensus process.


The parameter involved with the change is

   struct ElectableValidators {
        uint256 min;
        uint256 max;

The function that set the change is

    function setElectableValidators(uint256 min, uint256 max) public onlyOwner returns (bool) {
        require(0 < min, "Minimum electable validators cannot be zero");
        require(min <= max, "Maximum electable validators cannot be smaller than minimum");
            min != electableValidators.min || max != electableValidators.max,
            "Electable validators not changed"
        electableValidators = ElectableValidators(min, max);
        emit ElectableValidatorsSet(min, max);
        return true;

The proposed change to the function is

min = 1;
max = 40;

which means that there are 40 validators elected during an epoch.


The modification of the validator committee number will be in


Security Considerations



This work is licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0.

On-chain Voting



Absolutely support this! Increasing validators in the MAP Protocol will certainly enhance the network’s decentralization and security.

A commendable proposal! More validators can only mean a stronger and more resilient MAP Protocol.

I concur with this suggestion. Expanding our validator pool aligns with the growth trajectory of the network.

Adding more validators sounds promising. It could optimize transaction processing times and improve overall efficiency.

I’ve been hoping for this! With the surge in MAP Protocol usage, increasing the validators is a timely decision.

Is the current set of validators underperforming? I’d like to understand the core reason for this proposal before endorsing it.

Fully on board with this. As the MAP community grows, so should our validator count. It’s a forward-thinking approach.

While the idea is interesting, I’m curious about the immediate benefits. Do we have data showing that 5 more validators will bring substantial improvements?