Checklist for PTS to DPOS: You can help!

[yidaidaxia]

I just put more thoughts about to transfer PTS into BTSX system. I believe the best way to do that is BTSX core devleopment team to upgrade BTSX code.

1. Use certain time PTS blockchain snapshot information as "genius block" informatiom for generating PTS in BTSX system.

2. Remove "BitPTS" in BTSX system since it's worthless in this scenario

3. Set "PTS" as an BTSX asset, not BitAssets, more similar to user defined asset except for the initial generating method

4. Upgrade BTSX version(enforced).

5. PTS owners (at snapshot time) to claim their PTS in BTSX system w/ current PTS private keys after the BTSX version upgraded completed.

6. PTS runs in BTSX system.

Of course, meanwhile the public communication is also very important to make sure i.g. centerilzed exchanges also honor current PTS owners w/ this new PTS since they could get the new PTS w/ current PTS private keys anyway.

[JoeyD]

PTS and AGS aren't really DACs but more just the ledger itself. In the worst case scenario if something bad happened to BitShares X (which would be horrible for the entire BitShares ecosystem by the way), PTS/AGS just become temporarily frozen (much like AGS is currently) until we took a snapshot of their latest state from the failed BitShares X blockchain and put it into its own DAC.

Furthermore, there are good reasons to not put it on its own separate DPOS chain: its low market cap, especially as further snapshots erodes its value further, can hurt the security of DPOS against 51% stake attacks; it becomes more difficult (requires atomic cross-chain trading) to trade it against BTSX and the BitUSD most people will want to use (the one on the BitShares X DAC). And we all know that it makes no sense to let it continue as a POW coin.

Oh I agree about POW mining needing to stop, I could do without the  noise of these fans here. I also understand full well what kind of shock a failure of bitsharesX would bring, but on the other hand I really hope the ecosystem grows way beyond bitsharesX. So as the investment channel for future projects, I'm not too sure of PTS going down to nothing, it is also the only freehaven for competition which means that even the rise of competition could give pts some value, but I think all your other points are valid.

Still I can't get rid of this feeling of wanting PTS to be a separate entity. However I can't find the arguments to counterbalance your points at the moment, so I guess I'll have to sleep on it for now.

[arhag]

What if the rest of it was added to the pot to give BitAssets a more attractive yield?

Nothing would prevent I3 from selling it for other tokens to use for whatever purpose makes sense. They could trade the PROTO they receive for BitUSD and then burn the BitUSD (effectively increasing the BitUSD yield). Or just use that money for more development and marketing. Whatever makes the most sense.

[arhag]

I'm ambivalent on this as well. I'm not really comfortable with the idea that the intermediary for all DACs will become locked into this single DAC-experiment. To me it feels a bit like making the free-market less free. I'd rather not see PTS be a subsidiary of one single DAC. I'd like a more modular solution, where even bitsharesx could fail, but not take down the entire ecosystem.

PTS and AGS aren't really DACs but more just the ledger itself. In the worst case scenario if something bad happened to BitShares X (which would be horrible for the entire BitShares ecosystem by the way), PTS/AGS just become temporarily frozen (much like AGS is currently) until we took a snapshot of their latest state from the failed BitShares X blockchain and put it into its own DAC.

Furthermore, there are good reasons to not put it on its own separate DPOS chain: its low market cap, especially as further snapshots erodes its value further, can hurt the security of DPOS against 51% stake attacks; it becomes more difficult (requires atomic cross-chain trading) to trade it against BTSX and the BitUSD most people will want to use (the one on the BitShares X DAC). And we all know that it makes no sense to let it continue as a POW coin.

[gamey]

Here is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?

What if the rest of it was added to the pot to give BitAssets a more attractive yield?

I'd much rather give the PTS to I3.  Putting the PTS into a fund to help people currently isn't really a good longterm tactic.  We need the toolkit continually improved until is quite feature full.

edit - although i suspect it might be declined because it is no longer a mined currency that is being allocated.  It is probably just best to destroy the remaining unmined PTS.

[fuzzy]

This is an interesting discussion.

Just realize that if you make it into an asset, then there will never be a top 10 PTS crypto-coin.  It will always be an asset from here on out.

Also, it now relies on people to download and become involved with BTSX first, when BTSX was the product of PTS.  In some ways this could be good, but overall not so much.

I'm ambivalent about the whole thing in general.

I'm ambivalent on this as well. I'm not really comfortable with the idea that the intermediary for all DACs will become locked into this single DAC-experiment. To me it feels a bit like making the free-market less free. I'd rather not see PTS be a subsidiary of one single DAC. I'd like a more modular solution, where even bitsharesx could fail, but not take down the entire ecosystem.

[donkeypong]

Here is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?

What if the rest of it was added to the pot to give BitAssets a more attractive yield?

[GaltReport]

Here is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?

Sounds good to me.

[JoeyD]

This is an interesting discussion.

Just realize that if you make it into an asset, then there will never be a top 10 PTS crypto-coin.  It will always be an asset from here on out.

Also, it now relies on people to download and become involved with BTSX first, when BTSX was the product of PTS.  In some ways this could be good, but overall not so much.

I'm ambivalent about the whole thing in general.

I'm ambivalent on this as well. I'm not really comfortable with the idea that the intermediary for all DACs will become locked into this single DAC-experiment. To me it feels a bit like making the free-market less free. I'd rather not see PTS be a subsidiary of one single DAC. I'd like a more modular solution, where even bitsharesx could fail, but not take down the entire ecosystem.

[xeroc]

could we elaborate what happens to the price of BTSX when there is a snapshot in PTS (if it was a user-issued asset)?

[arhag]

Here is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?

[ripplexiaoshan]

It seems that how to implementation the no-mining PTS is still very controversy, why don't we start a poll?

 Personally, I prefer integrating PTS inside of BTSX. It will be the first valuable user issued asset, and will add value to BTSX wallet too, because at least there are more needs to open your wallet.

The reason that I don't like DPOS PTS is: 1\The value of PTS will be lower and lower as more snapshots of interesting DACs are conducted, and eventually will approach zero, if there is no new DAC for a period of time. It's not wise to invest on such stuff, even the cost of DPOS is not high; 2\ No PTS shareholder like their shares being diluted when only delegates benefit from it.

[gamey]

This is an interesting discussion.

Just realize that if you make it into an asset, then there will never be a top 10 PTS crypto-coin.  It will always be an asset from here on out.

Also, it now relies on people to download and become involved with BTSX first, when BTSX was the product of PTS.  In some ways this could be good, but overall not so much.

I'm ambivalent about the whole thing in general.

[yidaidaxia]

Go for it then, the OP is telling the people who keep insisting it needs a DPOS upgrade how to get started.
Maybe you can beat them to it as a user issued asset, or duke it out in this thread.

It would be really great to get all of the balances in the BitShares X blockchain at once though, say during one of the future hard forks. If that is not possible, then I guess people will have to donate some BTSX to pay for all the transaction fees necessary and quickly transfer all of the issued assets (I am going to name them PROTO in this post) to the appropriate addresses. Then trusted members of the community would have to look through the unspent transaction outputs to ensure they comply with the snapshots (or just have someone really trusted by the community, like toast or bytemaster, do the asset distribution in the first place). And only after the green light has been given by these trusted members would it be safe to start trading the PROTO assets on the BitShares X decentralized exchange. During this whole process from PTS snapshot until the green light has been given, all PTS trades everywhere would have to stop. After a successful transition PTS would become worthless (centralized exchanges can get rid of it, although the nice exchanges would credit people with PROTO IOUs just like they credited BTSX IOUs, and all PTS mining would stop for good).

So, who wants to help make this possible?

Edit: Also, PTS supply would be scaled up to 2 million in the snapshot for a total PROTO asset supply of 4 million (AGS + scaled PTS). Or rather, scale to something a tiny bit smaller than 2 million with the rest given to the PROTO asset issuer in order to repay the people who donated the BTSX to cover the fees of this process.

I think transfer pts to btsx inside market as an user defined assets makes more sense to me too. Besides development efficiency, another more important rationale to me is that it could bring more liquidity for btsx inside market, so it will be helpful to peg and health of btsx inside market, which is real important for the ecosystem now. In the other hand, as arhag indicated it's really viable.

[arhag]

Here is another way to phrase what I am proposing.

You can think of BTSX as an altcoin that was allocated 50% to an AGS snapshot and 50% to a PTS snapshot. It changed the social consensus in that future forks of the BitShares X DAC are expected to snapshot BTSX rather than AGS/PTS (and that is perfectly acceptable to our community).

Similarly, you can think of PROTO as an altcoin that is allocated 50% to AGS, (50-x)% to a PTS snapshot, and x% to the creators of the coin. The value of x will likely be very small (x < 1%?) and just enough to cover the fees involved for this process. This coin is guaranteed to never have any inflation. PROTO, like BTSX, also changes the social consensus. Instead of crediting at least 10% to AGS and 10% to PTS to get the support of the BitShares community, now DAC creators need to credit at least 20% to PROTO holders to get the same support.

Just like how the snapshot of PTS for BTSX caused a massive drop in price of PTS, the PROTO snapshot will cause a massive drop in the price of PTS. PTS will still exist after the snapshot, but because of the severe change in the social consensus, we expect its price to drop 100% down to zero. This means it makes no sense anymore to keep mining it, and it makes no sense anymore for exchanges to list them for trading.

Just like any other DAC snapshot, we need to give everyone clear notice about when the snapshot will occur and make it clear to everyone that it means that the price of PTS will drop to zero after the snapshot. And of course, this all requires getting the broad support of the community in agreeing to this change in the social consensus. Also, to reduce trading downtime, we should choose the snapshot date  to be at a point in time when we are actually ready to quickly transition over to the PROTO asset on the BitShares X blockchain.