Author Topic: Forcing people to lose their shares if they don't vote.  (Read 8633 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile

Does anyone think this hurts their property rights?



Communism has many forms….
-----------------------------------------------------
Full ownership rights agreement ( and Deed)
[/b]


1. You have full ownership rights on this piece of land. ( description____)

2. To continue having this right you must:

-plow it no earlier or later than 1st of May
-grow only corn (put exact brand here______)
- Use only combines provided by (put company name here______)
- Sell your entire crop @ 4.00 BTS/cryptomarketvolume to ((put company name here______)

3.Failiour to comply with any of 2. Will result in you losing 5% to 100% of your property…
--------------------------------------------------




So, is  this   infragments one’s property rights:
YES

Are you willing to accept it, personally:
In the form suggested probably yes, BUT not without keep an eye where it progresses from this semi-acceptable level!
« Last Edit: June 21, 2014, 01:28:25 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit

Does anyone think this hurts their property rights?

The idea is as a shareholder there would be some vote you would have to take part of every X time or your shares would be removed. This would also work great on top of air drops.  I think it'd make the system more responsive etc. Less likely for a minority to have too much power due to apathy of the majority.  In the end I think it could be a better proposition to those who wish to own a DAC.

I'm only partially trolling.

Thoughts ?

In a system with dividends you could give dividends to people who vote. By rejecting the people who don't vote from receiving dividends you both secure the system and encourage voting.

If your dividend depends on you voting then you'll vote. In fact everyone would participate in voting if they could be paid to vote.

That is just one way of doing it. Transaction fees which were designed to pay for dividends once upon a time could have easily been directed to the participants who consistently vote.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Mrrr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
I'm going to post a comment here that is perhaps not entirely OT.

According to Bytemaster the act of moving funds around is beneficial to the network.

The "silent long term holders, who might not have the technical knowledge, time, or interest to continually remember to shuffle around shares in various DACs" are exactly the people that should be negatively incentived to actively care for the network, rather than sit on their money and passively watch it grow.

Keyhotee (afaik) is a possible solution for the myriad of online holdings one will acquire over the years.

Up the inactivity fee to 50% for all I care.

Thomas Piketty anyone? :)

Offline mas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
The details are that that as long as you move your funds once per year... at the expense of a normal TRX fee you will not be charged 5%.

This proves ownership, allows the network to recapture 'lost keys', and helps clean up delegate votes.   

This also provides an opportunity for increased privacy because all money is moving frequently others don't know if transfers are to your self or to someone else.

The arguments above have their positive merits. This however will disadvantage silent long term holders, who might not have the technical knowledge, time, or interest to continually remember to shuffle around shares in various DACs. I can imagine that many years down the road, current Bitshares PTS and AGS holders will have shares/coins in multiple DACs, and this burden of having to remember to move them around once a year, can become onerous if you have multiple coins/shares.

5% seems somewhat high, perhaps a lower inactivity fee would balance your positive arguments, and my protection to long term holders without knowledge/time/ability to move things around.

Some (not necessarily me, but maybe) are in this for the long term, and would prefer to have a long term buy and hold without needing to move things around. The inactivity fee burdens those, and perhaps rewards those with shorter term horizons that might shuffle things faster.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
+5% for privacy .. havent considered that part yet ;)

Offline bytemaster

The details are that that as long as you move your funds once per year... at the expense of a normal TRX fee you will not be charged 5%.

This proves ownership, allows the network to recapture 'lost keys', and helps clean up delegate votes.   

This also provides an opportunity for increased privacy because all money is moving frequently others don't know if transfers are to your self or to someone else.
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 gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Well, 5% fee for not doing anything, or confiscating 5% of your account, comes out at the same.

Can anyone post a link or explanation on how this will operate?

I just made a post discussing the idea.  Don't panic please.  As I start to wrap my head around this stuff, I come up with more ideas. I just posted to stir up a discussion.

Toast - I did not know there was an inactivity fee being implemented. To give anything a serious comparison we'd have to come up with specific parameters.  I need to read more about inactivity fee but it likely is more reasonable than my all or nothing approach. ;)

Mas - As far as what vote I am talking about...  This would be for any DAC.  If you voted for board members, or even manually switching a delegate vote.  The idea is to enforce some level of participation.  The neat thing about DACs is any rule that can be implemented in code could be part of a DAC.  The other nice thing is that if you remove shares of those who don't vote, you can clean up outcome of the airdrop.  (Although I am not convinced this is actually as useful as it might seem at first glance...)

« Last Edit: June 09, 2014, 03:40:20 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.


Offline Amazon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 830
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Forum
Well, 5% fee for not doing anything, or confiscating 5% of your account, comes out at the same.

Can anyone post a link or explanation on how this will operate?

http://bitshares.org/faq/

It is not for PTS

Quote
What fees are charged to users of BitShares XT?

A small percentage fee is assessed for every trade on the exchange, a 5% margin call fee is assessed to every user subject to a margin call, and a 5% inactivity fee is assessed to every address that has had no activity for a full year.

Forum Donation: PforumPLfVQXTi4QpQqKwoChXHkoHcxGuA

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Well, 5% fee for not doing anything, or confiscating 5% of your account, comes out at the same.

Can anyone post a link or explanation on how this will operate?

This doesn't affect PTS. This is for future DACs only, and should be made clear by each individual DAC developer.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Its not there yet .. still on the todolist of github afair ..

Offline mas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Well, 5% fee for not doing anything, or confiscating 5% of your account, comes out at the same.

Can anyone post a link or explanation on how this will operate?

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Its a 5% inactivity fee .. no confiscation

Offline mas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
I hold some Bitshares PTS as a long term investment, and I don't plan to be actively involved. Came upon this thread by chance. Could someone explain, or link to an explanation, of what votes you are discussing?

Seems unfair to punish silent long term investors by confiscation.

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials