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: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism  (Read 1315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Overthetop


DPOS is running steadily and efficiently for more than 10 days.

What a great achivement for the whole crypto industry!

Now, the community is concerning and arguing about the potential uncontrollable centralization issue about the voting mechanism of the DPOS.

So, start this post to collect all kinds of good thoughts about trying to improve the DPOS Voting Mechanism .

Any idea is welcome here.

 :)

« Last Edit: August 03, 2014, 04:55:09 AM by Overthetop »
个人微博账号: Overthetop_万里晴空
“块链创新与创业”交流群: 330378613

Offline her0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
Re: About the improvement suggestion of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2014, 04:09:34 AM »
one share one vote.we need negative vote。

Offline Overthetop

Re: About the improvement suggestion of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2014, 04:12:17 AM »
one share one vote.we need negative vote。

agree, we should give the individuals the ability to post negative vote to the unlike delegates.

个人微博账号: Overthetop_万里晴空
“块链创新与创业”交流群: 330378613

Offline 乌鸦

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: About the improvement suggestion of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2014, 04:29:22 AM »
one share one vote.we need negative vote。

We only want freedom, justice and equality.It is DAC +5% +5% +5% +5%

Offline 天籁

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: About the improvement suggestion of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #4 on: August 03, 2014, 04:35:15 AM »
one share one vote.we need negative vote。

We only want freedom, justice and equality.It is DAC +5% +5% +5% +5%
+5%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6513.0 @Stan

Offline Overthetop

Re: About the improvement suggestion of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #5 on: August 03, 2014, 04:39:31 AM »
one share one vote.we need negative vote。

We only want freedom, justice and equality.It is DAC +5% +5% +5% +5%

Yes.
个人微博账号: Overthetop_万里晴空
“块链创新与创业”交流群: 330378613

Offline liondani

Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #6 on: August 03, 2014, 09:27:32 AM »
As bytemaster admitted the number of delegates are optimal right now but it doesn't mean they will be also in the future... Actual if the network grows (as we expect) the static number we are using right now (101) will not be the optimal (the notwork will look and will be more centralized that it could be)...
He recognizes that it exist a sweat spot each time, that change depended of multiple factors...
Please give some Ideas how it would be possible to find a number near  the sweat spot so we could practical use it and make the number of delegates dynamic ! (of course 101 minimum.)
Would it be a good idea 1. to implement a mechanism so the shareholders/users could vote for the number of delegates (like we do with the Priority Fee)? Or  2.using a prediction market somehow like bytemaster already mentioned? Have you other ideas on that?

based on bytemaster's quotes:
There is a point where the cost to add a new node equals the value that new node provides and this is the sweet spot you want for the number of validators.

does it mean you are thinking about to increase the number of delegates if you find a way to find the sweet spot?

It means that I know such a sweet spot exists... but that it is different for everyone because it involves "value judgements".  That sweet spot also changes over time as value judgements change over time.  This is like saying I know there exists a price for BTSX... I just couldn't tell you what it should be and it constantly changes.

Right now I just chose 101 as my opinion on what the sweet spot is.    Shareholders voting on it is another way and a prediction market is a 3rd way.   
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Offline liondani

Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #7 on: August 03, 2014, 09:52:08 AM »
I expressed my concerns in the past about the problem that it is difficult to recognize multiple delegate account's...
And it is a problem because the number of individual delegates are much less than it seems.... So right know the individulas delegates are not 101 but close to 30 if I am right !!!!
Count only the sub accounts that are on the first 101 places and the accounts we know from the forum that belong to the same individuals... I guess they exist a percentage of "sock puppet" delegates also... So I bring a proposal back to the table to give a motive to delegates to create sub account's if they want more than one delegates without the fear that the individual active delegates will go much below the 101 desired individual delegates... (imagine you have 30 favorite delegates that have also 2-3 very interesting sub.account delegates that you trust and vote.That means at the end, with the present system, the result is about 30 active individuals delegates instead of 101....)


What about this proposal: (?)

If sub account's get qualified for the active delegates, then the system could give additional active delegates slots !!!
For example, we have 101 active delegates and 12 sub.accounts (from some active parents) that made it to the 101. Don't replace the last 12 delegates with the new ones but let them continue to produce blocks!!! That means we have on this example 113 active delegates now!

1. In that way we can have great hopes that the individual delegates will be more and close to 101 in future because it gives a motive not to create "sock puppet" delegates...
2. even if you have "to much" active delegates it is not a problem because you know that the additional sub.parent delegates have the most of the time the parent.delegate quality...
3. In reality there is no reason to afraid that the number of active delegates will get to big because any voter will know that the sub account's are from the same individual so everybody will vote for them only if they are convinced that it is really worth (for security reasons, charity or whatever.) It will get very tough to convince to get votes for 10 different sub accounts
4.It will motivate delegates to have some sub accounts activated on different country's... (good for network security, and potential future legal issues)
5.It will motivate delegates to create subaccounts with low payrates to get more delegate accounts active... (Shareholders will win that way)
6.i guess there are more pros


Thoughts?
« Last Edit: August 03, 2014, 09:54:17 AM by liondani »
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12339
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2014, 01:05:20 PM »
@liomdani: nice thoughts .. you ar probably right about the decentralization factor of the delegates and i am very aware of the fact that i probably run one of the bigger groups here ..

but i also think that this will just be a matter of time until moste of my *.delegate.xeroc delegates are no longer voted in .. i also hope to keep the charity delegates up as long as possible for obvious reasons.

Having said all of this i think it is the responsibility of all stale holders to come to a decentralized distribution of individual delegate holders .. not only because of trust issue but also because of geografical reasons .. (btw: i hate my mobile keyboard )

Further, the market seems to play well as you can see i "only" have 3-4 *.delegate.xeroc delegates in the active list at different positions ..

Give it some more weeks and that issue will be resolved .. if not i will announce to no longer support my subaccounts and deactivate them one auto-fire is available on the blockchain
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
  • Witness: kokojie
  • Payrate: 3%
Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2014, 02:46:15 PM »
1 share 1 vote sounds better than the current system. Because I think the current system will allow 1 person or 1 small group of people with high amount of btsx, to control ALL delegates. Leading to centralization.

Offline bytemaster

Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #10 on: August 03, 2014, 02:57:54 PM »
1 share 1 vote sounds better than the current system. Because I think the current system will allow 1 person or 1 small group of people with high amount of btsx, to control ALL delegates. Leading to centralization.

One share 1 vote means that x% of the time a bad guy can produce disruptive blocks, skip blocks of the good guys, etc.
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 天籁

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #11 on: August 03, 2014, 03:10:24 PM »
1 share 1 vote sounds better than the current system. Because I think the current system will allow 1 person or 1 small group of people with high amount of btsx, to control ALL delegates. Leading to centralization.

One share 1 vote means that x% of the time a bad guy can produce disruptive blocks, skip blocks of the good guys, etc.
1. DAC's rules were coded in the codes, there is no good or evil, as long as the rules allow.
2. DAC itself is built on the untrust mechanism.

Offline 乌鸦

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2014, 04:44:57 PM »
1 share 1 vote sounds better than the current system. Because I think the current system will allow 1 person or 1 small group of people with high amount of btsx, to control ALL delegates. Leading to centralization.

One share 1 vote means that x% of the time a bad guy can produce disruptive blocks, skip blocks of the good guys, etc.

Just as a coin has two sides, no side is better than the other; it is often difficult to distinguish what is right from what is wrong?
We just need a law , justice and equality,1 share 1 vote is the right way.
Now, 1 person or 1 small group of people with high amount of btsx, he can control ALL delegatesbut, another side ,a lot of people can't vote to be a delegate even them win a lot of votes ,because them need over 700000000 votes ,Obviously this is not scientific。We can imagine,DPOS will be die without  competition!
If a bad guy can produce disruptive blocks,I guess he cann't be a delegate anymore,because every one can voting them out of the top 101。just the opposite,if not 1 share 1 vote,a bad guy supported by two or three group who has a great deal of bts,maybe he will always on the top 101.

here is the voice from the Chinese,people pay close attention to this.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6536.0

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6529.0

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6578.0

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6514.0

And I think 1 share 1 vote is the foundation of DPOS ;)
« Last Edit: August 03, 2014, 05:44:11 PM by rock57 »

Offline Overthetop

Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2014, 02:58:12 AM »
I expressed my concerns in the past about the problem that it is difficult to recognize multiple delegate account's...
And it is a problem because the number of individual delegates are much less than it seems.... So right know the individulas delegates are not 101 but close to 30 if I am right !!!!
Count only the sub accounts that are on the first 101 places and the accounts we know from the forum that belong to the same individuals... I guess they exist a percentage of "sock puppet" delegates also... So I bring a proposal back to the table to give a motive to delegates to create sub account's if they want more than one delegates without the fear that the individual active delegates will go much below the 101 desired individual delegates... (imagine you have 30 favorite delegates that have also 2-3 very interesting sub.account delegates that you trust and vote.That means at the end, with the present system, the result is about 30 active individuals delegates instead of 101....)


What about this proposal: (?)

If sub account's get qualified for the active delegates, then the system could give additional active delegates slots !!!
For example, we have 101 active delegates and 12 sub.accounts (from some active parents) that made it to the 101. Don't replace the last 12 delegates with the new ones but let them continue to produce blocks!!! That means we have on this example 113 active delegates now!

1. In that way we can have great hopes that the individual delegates will be more and close to 101 in future because it gives a motive not to create "sock puppet" delegates...
2. even if you have "to much" active delegates it is not a problem because you know that the additional sub.parent delegates have the most of the time the parent.delegate quality...
3. In reality there is no reason to afraid that the number of active delegates will get to big because any voter will know that the sub account's are from the same individual so everybody will vote for them only if they are convinced that it is really worth (for security reasons, charity or whatever.) It will get very tough to convince to get votes for 10 different sub accounts
4.It will motivate delegates to have some sub accounts activated on different country's... (good for network security, and potential future legal issues)
5.It will motivate delegates to create subaccounts with low payrates to get more delegate accounts active... (Shareholders will win that way)
6.i guess there are more pros


Thoughts?

How about "one wallet can only run one delegate" ?

个人微博账号: Overthetop_万里晴空
“块链创新与创业”交流群: 330378613

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12339
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: About the improvement suggestions of the DPOS Voting Mechanism
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2014, 06:33:59 AM »
would change anything as I can run several wallets on the same machine at the same time
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

 

Google+