# Delegation Feedback Rollup Thread

**URL:** <https://forum.thegraph.com/t/delegation-feedback-rollup-thread/79>\
**Category:** Feedback\
**Created:** [January 19, 2021, 1:59am UTC](https://forum.thegraph.com/t/delegation-feedback-rollup-thread/79 "2021-01-19T01:59:16Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 20

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![juanmardefago](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.thegraph.com/juanmardefago/32/1219_2.png) [@juanmardefago](https://forum.thegraph.com/u/juanmardefago)\
**Post date:** [March 30, 2021, 1:41am UTC](https://forum.thegraph.com/t/delegation-feedback-rollup-thread/79/20 "2021-03-30T01:41:16Z")

</div>

> [@Brandon](#):
>
> @juanmardefago I look forward to hearing your thoughts here. One thought that occured to me while re-reading the above is that if we fixed the issues around how rewards and fee cut were calculated AND fixed the issue with overdelegation making Delegator income unpredictable, the protocol might be at a state where more Indexers would feel comfortable setting longer cooldown periods.

Totally, we actually went the other way around on the [cooldown discussion](https://forum.thegraph.com/t/proposal-to-tie-cooldown-to-effective-cut/1554)

Basically the idea was to revamp the cooldown implementation to allow the indexers to change the fee cut even when the cooldown is applied, but only if the change would move the effective cut closer to the original effective cut calculated at the time when the cooldown was set. (to avoid having to revamp the cut system).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.thegraph.com/t/delegation-feedback-rollup-thread/79)._