# Consensus rewards whitepaper concern

**URL:** <https://forum.algorand.co/t/consensus-rewards-whitepaper-concern/11259>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [January 30, 2024, 9:10pm UTC](https://forum.algorand.co/t/consensus-rewards-whitepaper-concern/11259 "2024-01-30T21:10:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 69

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![algorander](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.algorand.co/algorander/32/719_2.png) [@algorander](https://forum.algorand.co/u/algorander)\
**Post date:** [April 29, 2024, 9:27pm UTC](https://forum.algorand.co/t/consensus-rewards-whitepaper-concern/11259/69 "2024-04-29T21:27:22Z")

</div>

Great idea! They say after 5 accounts performance may take a hit. John mentioned they may multi-thread that part later so more online accounts can be handled in parallel on a multi-core CPU. Either way it will be really hard to find users who will be willing to sign the registration transaction (and send it via email?). The user experience of pooling will be shitty without the smart contract. Ideally the protocol-core would allow a user to stake under a node without the need of a smart contract. Also, if users stake could be locked this would help push up price and security of the chain.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.algorand.co/t/consensus-rewards-whitepaper-concern/11259)._