Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets  (Read 1092 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bytemaster

Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« on: December 05, 2014, 02:32:46 PM »

In my quest to finish off the Version 1.0 protocol for BitShares I have spent a lot of time working on the feature set of User Issued Assets (UIA).  In particular I wanted them to be sufficiently flexible to be used by real companies to issue their shares.   When I was talking with Overstock one of their primary considerations was the ability for shareholders to vote with their stake.

Yesterday I added the necessary features to allow every UIA creator to generate proposals that can be voted on by the UIA holders.    This process leverages the same infrastructure as BTS uses to vote for delegates.   Every balance of a UIA can vote for up to 110 proposals by specifying a "slate" in the same way they specify a delegate slate.    Instead of voting for delegate it will now vote for proposals.

There is still a lot of work to be done to make this functionality available to the end users, but that kind of work can be done after protocol version 1.0 is finalized.  Specifically the format and representation of a proposal is merely an ID and its meaning is defined by an unspecified convention in the object graph.   

Other updates to UIA: 
   Issuers can freeze all markets in UIA (unless they revoke that permission)
   Issuers can freeze all balances of UIA (unless they revoke that permission)
   Issuers can cancel bids to buy the UIA returning the BitUSD/BTS to the bidder.

For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline oldman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2014, 02:40:08 PM »
Wow.  +5%

Bitshares is going to hit financial world like a tsunami.

Thank you for your work!

Offline BTSdac

Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2014, 02:44:15 PM »
 +5%
HI BM ,you said vote take much size in translation , have find any mothods to reduce the size and vote frequency.
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2014, 02:52:43 PM »
Great!  This will by useful material for my article series on UIA's.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2014, 02:53:49 PM »
This feature takes no more size in trx than was already used by bts delegate voting.   
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

clout

  • Guest
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2014, 02:54:39 PM »
are they limited to approval voting?

Offline bytemaster

Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2014, 02:56:10 PM »

are they limited to approval voting?

How the data is interpreted is up to the company
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2014, 03:11:03 PM »
"Issuers can cancel bids to buy the UIA returning the BitUSD/BTS to the bidder."
Can this be revoked by the issuer too?
How exactly is it supposed to work?

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2014, 03:15:41 PM »
Just tossing around additional fun ideas...

- Allow the current asset holders to vote by majority approval to allow a new public key to be authorized to hold this asset (sort of like members of the club who must vote to let in a new member)

- Non-binding polls (don't need to be tracked by delegates) only open to those asset holders (maybe this is all you are saying with proposals?).

- Asset holders use approval voting to elect workers paid via dilution of the asset with new assets.  Or paid with a central fund controlled by the asset holders as a whole, like this: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5030.0

- If the asset holders exercise group control over a central fund, you could send money to the group as a whole instead of to any individual…

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2014, 08:39:07 PM »
In my quest to finish off the Version 1.0 protocol for BitShares I have spent a lot of time working on the feature set of User Issued Assets (UIA).  In particular I wanted them to be sufficiently flexible to be used by real companies to issue their shares.   When I was talking with Overstock one of their primary considerations was the ability for shareholders to vote with their stake.

Great.

Yesterday I added the necessary features to allow every UIA creator to generate proposals that can be voted on by the UIA holders.    This process leverages the same infrastructure as BTS uses to vote for delegates.   Every balance of a UIA can vote for up to 110 proposals by specifying a "slate" in the same way they specify a delegate slate.    Instead of voting for delegate it will now vote for proposals.

Can you please cut that down to 55 proposals and allow stakeholders to voice three opinions on any proposal: neutral (default), approval, and disapproval. I think it is incredibly useful to understand the breakdown of approval vs disapproval in the sample of stakeholders who are interested enough to bother voting.

Also, if I understand correctly there is only 2 bytes used per delegate in a slate (or in this case ID of a proposal). Meaning the full slate would take up 220 bytes, correct? This allows for addressing only 65,536 proposals. This might be large enough for delegate candidates (but even that can be easily exhausted in the future, what happens then by the way?), but it seems too constraining for all the proposals a company will want to do in its lifetime. So is there a way of killing off old proposals and reassigning IDs to not put a bound on the total number of proposals a UIA can vote on in its lifetime?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2014, 08:41:04 PM by arhag »

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3507
    • View Profile
  • BTS: Ander
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2014, 08:45:14 PM »

Can you please cut that down to 55 proposals and allow stakeholders to voice three opinions on any proposal: neutral (default), approval, and disapproval. I think it is incredibly useful to understand the breakdown of approval vs disapproval in the sample of stakeholders who are interested enough to bother voting.

I agree, this would be much more useful information, and thus increase the utility for whoever was trying to conduct a poll of their shareholders.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline bytemaster

Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2014, 08:46:07 PM »
In my quest to finish off the Version 1.0 protocol for BitShares I have spent a lot of time working on the feature set of User Issued Assets (UIA).  In particular I wanted them to be sufficiently flexible to be used by real companies to issue their shares.   When I was talking with Overstock one of their primary considerations was the ability for shareholders to vote with their stake.

Great.

Yesterday I added the necessary features to allow every UIA creator to generate proposals that can be voted on by the UIA holders.    This process leverages the same infrastructure as BTS uses to vote for delegates.   Every balance of a UIA can vote for up to 110 proposals by specifying a "slate" in the same way they specify a delegate slate.    Instead of voting for delegate it will now vote for proposals.

Can you please cut that down to 55 proposals and allow stakeholders to voice three opinions on any proposal: neutral (default), approval, and disapproval. I think it is incredibly useful to understand the breakdown of approval vs disapproval in the sample of stakeholders who are interested enough to bother voting.

Also, if I understand correctly there is only 2 bytes used per delegate in a slate (or in this case ID of a proposal). Meaning the full slate would take up 220 bytes, correct? This allows for addressing only 65,536 proposals. This might be large enough for delegate candidates (but even that can be easily exhausted in the future, what happens then by the way?), but it seems too constraining for all the proposals a company will want to do in its lifetime. So is there a way of killing off old proposals and reassigning IDs to not put a bound on the total number of proposals a UIA can vote on in its lifetime?

You already have 3 opinions:  +/- or "none" so that is done.

You can change the meaning of a proposal at will so once everyone has removed their vote from an old proposal the ID can be reused.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2014, 08:55:40 PM »
You already have 3 opinions:  +/- or "none" so that is done.

Great. Thanks.

You can change the meaning of a proposal at will so once everyone has removed their vote from an old proposal the ID can be reused.

And as far as non-binding proposals (which I understand that is what this topic is about), the person counting the vote for a particular proposal could always ignore transaction balances voting on that proposal ID that are older than the block the new proposal was submitted. This could allow them to safely change the meaning of a proposal even if someone was too lazy to stop voting for it and not count their old votes as votes for the new proposal. That's a good solution for non-binding proposals.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2014, 08:56:55 PM »
You already have 3 opinions:  +/- or "none" so that is done.

Great. Thanks.

You can change the meaning of a proposal at will so once everyone has removed their vote from an old proposal the ID can be reused.

And as far as non-binding proposals (which I understand that is what this topic is about), the person counting the vote for a particular proposal could always ignore transaction balances voting on that proposal ID that are older than the block the new proposal was submitted. This could allow them to safely change the meaning of a proposal even if someone was too lazy to stop voting for it and not count their old votes as votes for the new proposal. That's a good solution for non-binding proposals.

All proposals will be "non binding" until smart contracts exist with scripting that may care about the result.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Proposal Voting for User Issued Assets
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2014, 09:04:54 PM »
- Allow the current asset holders to vote by majority approval to allow a new public key to be authorized to hold this asset (sort of like members of the club who must vote to let in a new member)

Yes please! I assume you mean the public key of the issuer of the UIA (who also gets to freeze funds and manage the whitelist), which would accomplish what you want. I was asking for that in this post (see last paragraph). It is a necessary component of my larger proposal discussed here to make UIAs into shares of side/child DACs.

Edit: Here is how it can be done. Proposal ID 0 can be reserved for a panic button (see my proposal linked above). If enough (say >10%) of UIA upvotes proposal ID 0, the UIA is put in a state of panic (more details about what this does included in my proposal, but for simplicity just assume that it temporarily makes it so that all activity dealing with the UIA freezes except for changing votes, this especially includes all activity by the issuer). If enough (say >50%) of stake downvotes proposal ID 0, the panic is lifted as a false alarm (later implementations would also tax the 10% UIA that voted for the panic in the first place). On the other hand if enough (again >50%) of stake both upvote proposal ID 0 and also choose the same hash of the condition to satisfy to authenticate UIA issuer transactions (single payer or multisig), which would be an optional value that could be attached to the transaction during states of panic, then the panic would be lifted as a legitimate panic (no taxing the people who sounded the alarms, instead the new issuer would reward them), and the issuer is changed to the one who satisfies the conditions that hash to the value the stakeholders agreed to.

- Asset holders use approval voting to elect workers paid via dilution of the asset with new assets.  Or paid with a central fund controlled by the asset holders as a whole, like this: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5030.0

- If the asset holders exercise group control over a central fund, you could send money to the group as a whole instead of to any individual…

Seriously, you should check out the proposal in my post. It is very similar to your proposal in that Community Funding post, but I make the mechanics a little more concrete.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2014, 09:25:25 PM by arhag »

 

Google+