Criteria for selecting delegates

[arhag]

I suppose public identities could work if we could actually have face to face discussions with the delegate to understand that they really are community members and have the technical know-how.

And that doesn't have to be done in person. We could use Hangouts on Air, or even Mumble after associating the delegate's voice to their voice in the YouTube video.

But there is also the other question of whether having the identity of a delegate publicly known (and thus also known to attackers) would make the system less secure.

[santaclause102]

Great, such a discussion enhances the quality and security of DPOS considerably.

Whether identity has been verified sufficiently is up to the voters. Public identity makes sense long term imo since a delegate would risk his overal reputation if the scam is revealed (if someone points out that the picture belongs to someone else).

[arhag]

I agree with criteria 2 to 5. I would like to agree with criterion 1 as well, but I question how much value it actually adds. It brings up emski's question:

How do you verify identity?

The candidate could post a YouTube video where they say their full name, country of residence, and delegate account name in clear view of the camera. But how would we know that is the real delegate and not some actor an attacker hired to act as the person behind one of the attacker's many sockpuppet delegates?

It seems to me that pseudonyms with community trust built over time is good enough.

[emski]

How do you verify identity?

[alphaBar]

So far, the following delegates have revealed their identity:

• user: liondani, delegate: delegate.liondani, verification: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6406
• user: maqifrnswa, delegate: maqifrnswa, verification: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5938
• *user: GaltReport, delegate: delegate1-galt, verification: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6041.0
• user: bdnoble, delegate: bdnoble, verification: http://bitshares.org/community/team/
• user: CoinHoarder, delegate: delegate.coinhoarder, verification: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7722.msg102736#msg102736
• user: emski, delegates: lotto.bitdelegate or angel.bitdelegate, verification: https://www.linkedin.com/in/emilvelichkov
• user: amencon, delegate: alecmenconi, verification: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/alec-menconi/47/685/a42

*offered identity verification to I3



If you are willing to reveal your identity, please do so here and list your delegate. PM me if you'd like to modify/remove this info.

[alphaBar]

Some criteria I use for selecting delegates (in order of importance):

1) Has the delegate revealed their realworld identity?

Exposing your identity is the single biggest deterrent to doing anything malicious.

2) What is their history/reputation in the community and forums?

Important, ideally in conjunction with #1.

3) Are they technically competent?

The client is not yet resilient enough to be managed by non-technical delegates. Delegates should be scripting their price feed updates and missed block notification, and should be able to react swiftly to attacks on the network.

4) Are they running more than 1 delegate?

I refuse to vote more than 1 delegate per person. Furthermore, if a person has more than a couple of delegates in the top 101 I will do my best to vote them ALL out. It is harmful and should be discouraged.

5) What is their payrate and usage of funds?

Obvious, but not terribly important.

Based on these criteria I think the quality of delegates needs to improve.