voting by everyone is inefficient.
BTS probably needs a currency for lazy customers and shares for active shareholders.
Customers get a no inflation currency and & don't have to vote, pay for, or worry about development. (But they do pay transaction fees.)
Shareholders get a share that pays dividends from income but they have to actively vote (or they will lose shares) and obviously make BTS profitable.
So the you would use the currency as collateral right?
I'm not sure.
I think that long term expecting customers/users to actively manage BTS or any currency is not realistic.
The same way you wouldn't expect someone who bought a Big Mac or a pair of Nike to actively manage McDonalds or Nike.
Shareholders however can be expected to take an interest in return for potential dividends & growth.
So I do think BTS probably needs two units, a voting unit, designed to appeal to shareholders and a currency unit designed to appeal to customers. (Which lets millions of customers be completely lazy and just use BTS for its functionality without compromising the security of the system.)
You are talking about creating an oligarchy.. not exactly a freedom loving concept for what BitShares is supposed to be accomplishing.. 'for all'.
No I'm talking about running a company. Almost every single company in the world works like this.
Shareholders own and manage the company. Customers buy/use the products.
The customers of McDonalds/Starbucks/Apple/Barclays/etc. don't want to run the company, they just want their Big Mac/Latte/Savings account.
Bitcoin/PayPal/Vault users want to save/spend/transfer their money they don't want to be responsible for the security, management and development of that company.
Regardless whether you agree with me, you'll see in practice, customers just want functionality, they don't want to vote, so the more popular & distributed BTS becomes the less people will be voting and the less secure & more vulnerable to attack BTS will be.
Anyway it's a medium term problem, and BTS is good at evolving, so I'm sure it will be able to adapt if it proves necessary.
Proxy voting should help with that I guess. What we could have is an introduction to the wallet when you access it and on top of saying things like it's risky to invest in BTS because it's volatile, we could also have a message pointing to the voting tab saying voting is an important right we have and to prevent people from not voting, that they can, if they want, delegate someone to vote for them. But everyone who does his due diligence before investing knows they have the power to vote and should do so
Yes that may help, though it may cause BitShares to become a bit more centralised around a few people.
Bitshares isn't a company though it's a community.
I don't quite understand the parallels illustrated here with companies and customers... it's suggesting an ownership and a consumer class.. but bitshares is where all of us are owners. The bottom line though is that nothing good comes from creating an elite class that disenfranchise the masses on the premise that they are 'too lazy' or too stupid to have a vote.
Liberty, Freedom, and Property for All.
The issues we face and have faced is primarily a communication one.
Come 2.0 in the not so distant future there will be far more engagement. The past year we have learned a lot.
Proxy voting will be good for the disengaged who choose to be and trust in others. This of course assumes a communication vacuum that will see proxy being used extensively.
I don't think we are going to have this same kind of vacuum much longer though. The 2.0 platform is going to enable us to create solutions that solve this.. like dposhub among other things.
Users tomorrow are not going to be mostly traders either. Demographics are going to be diverse and will be far outside the scope of crypto enthusiasts. So you are going to see a dramatic shift in community culture come about.
I realize the issues of the day are difficult to grapple with when we don't know what tomorrow is going to look like.
Right now all we can do to deal with this dead delegate is to keep putting the message out for people to update their votes and remove him... it's a communication issue,.
Community is always messy and difficult. For those that don't really grow up participating in them it's even more frustrating and appears inefficient and stupid. What is often missed is the patience and understanding learned through the practiced process.