About workers: 1.14.35/36Fund to pay dividend

[puppies]

This idea of changing the voting mechanics is only another overreact against a currently non-issue, since all workers are still active.

Instead of focusing on attacking yunbi and whoever support the anti-dilution ideas, why don't you guys try to bring more knowledge and awareness to those who
1) don't vote, directly or indirectly
2) trade on centralized exchange instead of using the dex
3) leave their bts on centralized exchange for a very long time, way more than the time needed for "just" buy and sell
4) ask some proxies to review their current vote (jakub(21M) is voting only for 2 of 6 development-worker; fav(12M) could remove his support to refund-1 plus is voting only for 1 development-worker; clayop (5M) could remove his support to refund-3; mindphlux(5M) could remove support from refund-1; and so on)

You guys are always so ready to attack these "anti-dilution gang" and name them "irrational" "stupid" "nonsense" "bts destroyer" and so on... The reality is just that they are normal people as all fo you, that only thinks differently then you are. They have different views on what is best for bitshares. That's all.

So please, focus on the real problem and on real solution, without overreacting all the time.

About this coind/days vothing thing. Just look here:
http://cryptofresh.com/u/poloniexcoldstorage
http://cryptofresh.com/u/btc38-public-for-bts-cold

poloniex cold wallet (420M) last movement  --> more than 2 months ago!
btc38 cold wallet (360M) last movement       --> never moved funds! almosth 5 months!

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

100% agree bhuz.

For the record I disagree with the anti-dilution crowd.  I think that we should fund development with worker proposals.  Some of the anti anti dilution crowd are acting like the anti dilution crowd just killed their dog.  I would understand if any of the workers were voted out, or if we couldn't get something funded that was absolutely essential.  All I see the anti dilution crowd actually doing though is increasing the security of bitshares by raising the refund workers to a healthy level.  If we can't get a valid worker proposal past what clearly appears to be the minority then we probably don't need that funding after all. 

Remember guys this is bitshares.  We have a lot of the same problems as the bitcoin community.  We get mad at each other and call each other names.  Put words in each others mouths, and assume the worst intentions.  We fight and bicker.  But when we are done with all that negative shit we vote.  We vote and we move on.  That is one of the things that makes us so much better than bitcoin.  Lets celebrate what makes us better than bitcoin, and accept that none of us is going to get their way 100% of the time. 

[yvv]

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

Actually I think not, because in that case I assume many "shareholders" would move their coins from centralized exchanges to their own accounts so their cold wallets amounts would significant decrease... perhaps slowly but they would (depended on how fast shareholders get "educated" and... convinced)

Why would they move their bts if they are not doing it now? If they really care about voting they would already move their funds back. It is clear that most users don't really care about voting, no matter the increased power the coin days could bring them.

Edit: the point is "educating" them, as you said; not change the rules and voting mechanics

These are true points. Voting with money is a nice and easy to implement concept, which is flawed, but works fairly well in many situations. The problem with bitshares is that people who posses voting tokens do not care to give them away.  They don't care, they lose their votes. Those who care, pick up their votes, and do whatever they think is good to do. This is very natural and democratic. Is it good or bad for network, time will tell.

[liondani]

Why would they move their bts if they are not doing it now? If they really care about voting they would already move their funds back. It is clear that most users don't really care about voting, no matter the increased power the coin days could bring them.

They don't care for voting but for dividends(that's why the will move their funds)... they will for sure not transfer funds to vote,  but it is still better than exchanges to vote for them... Voting power of centralized exchanges will a least have less impact.... no?  VOTING POWER DECENTRALIZATION  :P

[Bhuz]

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

Actually I think not, because in that case I assume many "shareholders" would move their coins from centralized exchanges to their own accounts so their cold wallets amounts would significant decrease... perhaps slowly but they would (depended on how fast shareholders get "educated" and... convinced)

Why would they move their bts if they are not doing it now? If they really care about voting they would already move their funds back. It is clear that most users don't really care about voting, no matter the increased power the coin days could bring them.

Edit: the point is "educating" them, as you said; not change the rules and voting mechanics

[liondani]

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

Actually I think not, because in that case I assume many "shareholders" would move their coins from centralized exchanges to their own accounts so their cold wallets amounts would significant decrease... perhaps slowly but they would (depended on how fast shareholders get "educated" and... convinced)

[abit]

This idea of changing the voting mechanics is only another overreact against a currently non-issue, since all workers are still active.

Instead of focusing on attacking yunbi and whoever support the anti-dilution ideas, why don't you guys try to bring more knowledge and awareness to those who
1) don't vote, directly or indirectly
2) trade on centralized exchange instead of using the dex
3) leave their bts on centralized exchange for a very long time, way more than the time needed for "just" buy and sell
4) ask some proxies to review their current vote (jakub(21M) is voting only for 2 of 6 development-worker; fav(12M) could remove his support to refund-1 plus is voting only for 1 development-worker; clayop (5M) could remove his support to refund-3; mindphlux(5M) could remove support from refund-1; and so on)

Pinging @jakub @fav @clayop @mindphlux

You guys are always so ready to attack these "anti-dilution gang" and name them "irrational" "stupid" "nonsense" "bts destroyer" and so on... The reality is just that they are normal people as all fo you, that only thinks differently then you are. They have different views on what is best for bitshares. That's all.

So please, focus on the real problem and on real solution, without overreacting all the time.

About this coind/days vothing thing. Just look here:
http://cryptofresh.com/u/poloniexcoldstorage
http://cryptofresh.com/u/btc38-public-for-bts-cold

poloniex cold wallet (420M) last movement  --> more than 2 months ago!
btc38 cold wallet (360M) last movement       --> never moved funds! almosth 5 months!

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

[Bhuz]

This idea of changing the voting mechanics is only another overreact against a currently non-issue, since all workers are still active.

Instead of focusing on attacking yunbi and whoever support the anti-dilution ideas, why don't you guys try to bring more knowledge and awareness to those who
1) don't vote, directly or indirectly
2) trade on centralized exchange instead of using the dex
3) leave their bts on centralized exchange for a very long time, way more than the time needed for "just" buy and sell
4) ask some proxies to review their current vote (jakub(21M) is voting only for 2 of 6 development-worker; fav(12M) could remove his support to refund-1 plus is voting only for 1 development-worker; clayop (5M) could remove his support to refund-3; mindphlux(5M) could remove support from refund-1; and so on)

You guys are always so ready to attack these "anti-dilution gang" and name them "irrational" "stupid" "nonsense" "bts destroyer" and so on... The reality is just that they are normal people as all fo you, that only thinks differently then you are. They have different views on what is best for bitshares. That's all.

So please, focus on the real problem and on real solution, without overreacting all the time.

About this coind/days vothing thing. Just look here:
http://cryptofresh.com/u/poloniexcoldstorage
http://cryptofresh.com/u/btc38-public-for-bts-cold

poloniex cold wallet (420M) last movement  --> more than 2 months ago!
btc38 cold wallet (360M) last movement       --> never moved funds! almosth 5 months!

So your idea of coin days would only really increase the central exchanges voting power!

[Pheonike]

They are moving big amounts funds between their wallets, even their cold storage which is destroying coin-days. At those amounts they don't need to move often to destroy a lot of days when they do.

http://cryptofresh.com/u/poloniexcoldstorage

[liondani]

People who keep there BTS on exchanges are constantly buying and selling which means the coin-days total will not grow as fast of those who hold. Therefore the people who hold will gradually gain more voting power because their coin-days are not constantly getting destroyed.

They are buying and selling, but BTS stay in same aggregated wallet. Only numbers in centralized exchange database are changing.

exactly, their cold-wallets (with huge amount of BTS) don't change so often... only BTS on their hot-wallets get transfered all the time and only because of withdrawals and deposits of their customers and NOT because of trading as @yvv mentioned....

[yvv]

People who keep there BTS on exchanges are constantly buying and selling which means the coin-days total will not grow as fast of those who hold. Therefore the people who hold will gradually gain more voting power because their coin-days are not constantly getting destroyed.

They are buying and selling, but BTS stay in same aggregated wallet. Only numbers in centralized exchange database are changing.

[Pheonike]

It will reward those who care about voting by making their vote count more. People who keep there BTS on exchanges are constantly buying and selling which means the exchanges coin-days total will not grow as fast of those who hold. Therefore the people who hold will gradually gain more voting power because their coin-days are not constantly getting destroyed. 

[yvv]

It's rewarding those who hold and keep their BTS in their account. It's those people who more than likely care about the long-term value of BTS. Short-term people are ones most likely to sell or keep their BTS on other exchanges. Therefore they should not have as much sway in decisions. At minimum they maintain the votes they currently have.

It will not reward those who hold and keep their BTS in their account, it will give more voting power to them. For example, if a bunch of occasional crypto traders, who don't give a shit about bitshares and about voting, keep their funds on centralized exchange, you will give even more voting power to that exchange, than they have now.

[Thom]

woah, bad idea. why discourage new prospective shareholders?

Would you kindly elaborate? How does this idea discourage prospective shareholders?

[yvv]

This kind of attack was inevitable. And the more bitshares gets popular more attacks will come. Measuring voting power with BTS stake is good and simple way, but it evidently has weaknesses which can be exploited. This network needs some way of building reputation and storing it into blockchain in such way, that it does not violates the rights of newcomers too much.

[Pheonike]

It's rewarding those who hold and keep their BTS in their account. It's those people who more than likely care about the long-term value of BTS. Short-term people are ones most likely to sell or keep their BTS on other exchanges. Therefore they should not have as much sway in decisions. At minimum they maintain the votes they currently have.