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: Beyond Bitcoin (BTS) Hangout: Choosing the PR Review Board @ 11AM EST Today  (Read 304 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fuzzy


This Hangout is BitShares Governance Hangout #1:  How to choose the PR Review Board

Please ask questions below. 

Or better yet--Join us!  For updates on upcoming events, attend, record and report live from our Mumble Server!
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

Offline Thom

I left mumble after posting a chat msg b/c the discussion at that time wasn't about review bd but rather about various features and how to choose them. That's an important discussion to be sure, but IMO BitShares is still too young to pull leadership decisions out of Dan / Stan's hands and into those of shareholders for development direction issues.

This was what CryptoPrometheus raised ann BM addressed near the end of the early mumble. BM did a good job IMO of explaining the role of the review board vs. how operational issues are raised, discussed and decided.

We still need some centralized leadership (with shareholder oversight) until our ecosystem is mature enough to bring issues that change the course of development in fundamental ways to the broad spectrum of shareholders.

Also, for some reason I was unable to speak, even after exiting and coming back in twice. It was like my mic was muted.
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech Team Witness Proposal: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,13837.msg243656.html#msg243656

Online BunkerChain Labs

Also, for some reason I was unable to speak, even after exiting and coming back in twice. It was like my mic was muted.



 :-X
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | World's First Decentralized Tournament Platform Built Entirely on the Blockchain!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

I left mumble after posting a chat msg b/c the discussion at that time wasn't about review bd but rather about various features and how to choose them. That's an important discussion to be sure, but IMO BitShares is still too young to pull leadership decisions out of Dan / Stan's hands and into those of shareholders for development direction issues.

This was what CryptoPrometheus raised ann BM addressed near the end of the early mumble. BM did a good job IMO of explaining the role of the review board vs. how operational issues are raised, discussed and decided.

We still need some centralized leadership (with shareholder oversight) until our ecosystem is mature enough to bring issues that change the course of development in fundamental ways to the broad spectrum of shareholders.

Also, for some reason I was unable to speak, even after exiting and coming back in twice. It was like my mic was muted.

Okay good. I had your back in this Thom. Don't know if I did too great of an explanation but I tried to use the analogy of Recursion and having a solid base case/definition which I believe Dan and Stan (the Mans) are in our plan to get Bitshares out of a Jam and making it rain on all of us like a Dam  8)

Yes that all rhymes. Anyways you are correct. They are needed at the foundation. We need their leadership. Period. We don't even need to use the word centralized. Its counter productive and suggests their leadership is a bug rather than a feature.

There is no decentralized algorithm that can currently replace the unique human mind of our Founders. And there will not be for a very VERY long time. That's a mode of artificial intelligence that just cannot be done. "Decentralization" is like the wizard of Oz now to me. Look behind the curtain. Its only working very well for somethings but it is very counterproductive in a lot of important things especially in the life of a project so young.

Its like asking everyone in the world to be a baby's parent went it is born. What type of non$ense is that? Look at its actual parents and start there.

As long as the founders of Bitshares can keep to their word in building out Bitshares as a function that necessarily computes their philosophy as defined then there is no way that we can have any other type of system other than one in which Bitshares is decentralized. For even they have to follow the rule of law (or its automated computing function). As they are the ones providing the definitions of its system with upgrades.

If Satoshi had stuck with his project and lead it to a point where it could really walk on its own in its original vision it wouldn't have grown up to be such a bad teen with no Father and increasingly bad influences around it which now unfortunately determine its future. Reminds me of a lot of these Chicago kids...

Anyways we need to not fall into that same trap with all this decentralized decentralized decentralized mantras. Everything in moderation and in due time. If WE coded it correctly "decentralization" will naturally happen AT THE RIGHT TIME and in the right way with Bitshares.

In the short term the technology doesn't work without the Human element. Period. And there are no other humans that are better for it than Dan and Stan. People need to come to grips with that and lets move forward. Right now as with any baby Bitshares naturally needs its natural parents. It needs this technology to be nurtured and developed in the right direction. America became what it was because it had the right direction and the right parents. Not the perfect direction or the perfect parents but the right ones. It had the right parents to write its base function. We shouldn't take the parents away from the child. End of story.
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline CryptoPrometheus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
I left mumble after posting a chat msg b/c the discussion at that time wasn't about review bd but rather about various features and how to choose them. That's an important discussion to be sure, but IMO BitShares is still too young to pull leadership decisions out of Dan / Stan's hands and into those of shareholders for development direction issues.


I disagree with the idea that we can debate how to manage PR without also considering the process through which the core development decisions are determined. IMO, To deal with the two in isolation would be to foolishly discount the ways in which they are interdependent. I might be wrong, but it seemed to me that Dan is at least somewhat in agreement with this. If you listen to the clip from 49:00 to 51:35 (uncut version),  he conflates the ideas of a "review board" consulting and making developmental decisions as well as overseeing the PR.  At 49:57 (uncut version), for example, he mentions a hypothetical situation about deciding whether to implement prediction markets.  I think Bytemaster did a great job this morning at explaining his view/understanding of the situation, but I also think there is much more discussion to be had before people can be satisfied that we have a workable solution in place.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2015, 08:15:36 PM by CryptoPrometheus »
"Power and law are not synonymous. In fact, they are often in opposition and irreconcilable."
- Cicero

 

Google+