In my view, the most effective way to discourage operators from running multiple validators and multiple identities is to fundamentally rethink the validator reward and election system
If our real goal is to have approximately 300 validators operated by 300 different entities or individuals (or any other number), rather than a handful of large players controlling hundreds of nodes - then we may need to move away from the current Phragmén model. A better approach could be to let nominators select just one validator per nomination (with the same amount of stake), and distribute rewards proportionally to the stake each validator receives, similar to how it works in many other blockchains
This change would remove the economic incentive to run multiple nodes. Validators would be motivated to focus all their energy and resources on operating a single, high-quality node instead
To ensure smaller validators can still sustain themselves, we could introduce a modest base reward, for example, a fixed amount per month with the remaining rewards distributed proportionally according to stake. This would prevent validators with very low stake from earning almost nothing, while keeping the system fair
It’s widely acknowledged that the current validator set has some significant issues. The existing model already encourages operators to run multiple validators, which has unfortunately led to many using different identities as well. With the upcoming changes, a single large entity could even more easily run dozens of validators by simply providing the required 10k self-bond for each
For these reasons, I believe a more fundamental reform would be healthier for the long term. At the moment, it feels like we’re reinforcing a system that is already showing clear weaknesses