I see flows here if node count has been reduced based on Weightage staked. Currently most of nodes are being hosted by 3rd party services like Coder, Poktpool, Thuderstake etc… Based on weightage staked, most of these big node runners will stake with upped limits as they have power (enough tokens) to do so. In such case, i assume almost 80% of nodes will be capped at upper staked limit.
I believe in such case, rest 20% node will “never” get any session. On theory its all about probabilities, but in practical those min or low weighted nodes will starve for session. You guys are assuming based on probabilities that low staked will get session. But this can be proved only once its implemented. As being Software developer, i see “starvation” problem here. This is just what i believe based on knowledge.
Another criteria is, even though with above flows, if node counts reduced based on weightage stake to reduce infra cost, then i believe inflation should be reduced to same percentage. I read in between line that Inflation will be controlled based on WAGMI. But if node count is being reduced on emergency basis then inflation should be also control immediately and should not wait for WAGMI to reduce it on later point.
Consider this example : Inflation control in alignment with "reducing node count"