Back to collectionThin Trading, Uneven Rewards, and a Proposal Still in Question
Challenge rewards on the chain still followed the timing of batch submissions, and operators were already discussing payment based on the time since the previous challenge. XAI kept grinding within a range from 0.166 to 0.20 on very low volume. The simultaneous fall in two pools made the settings of a single pool an incomplete explanation.
A creative chronicle combining project history with imagined scenes. Story events are not verification of network activity.
Challenge rewards on the chain still followed the timing of batch submissions, and operators were already discussing payment based on the time since the previous challenge. Beyond the dull trading within a price range, people in the staking area had a more immediate question: why had the rewards shown on their pages suddenly changed?
XAI kept grinding within a range from 0.166 to 0.20 on very low volume. One person staking in two pools saw output fall by half in both and immediately asked whether the halving had arrived early. Another posted a screenshot showing that rewards had arrived normally for only one hour out of eight. The official response said batch submissions had no strict frequency guarantee in the first place; that was precisely why the reward adjustment had been proposed.
The simultaneous fall in two pools made the settings of a single pool an incomplete explanation. The eight-hour screenshot gave a concrete picture of the interruptions operators felt. The official response explained the reason for the proposal, but did not identify a definite cause for every payment. The Night Watchman planned to sort out when different operators saw gaps and keep asking how the proposed system would account for rewards during the wait.