We are in favor of separating block signers from delegate accounts.
A block signer can be appointed and paid by a delegate and can be fired/reassigned at any time by a delegate.
We cannot have more than 101 elected positions, it simply doesn't scale.
so marketer delegates don't have to know about server/vps...etc and still can be paid by a network ? That would be nice ...
I've been wondering about this ever since I heard MeTHoDx should be a delegate. Don't get me wrong, I really like the guy, but does he have the technical chops to run a delegate node with the level of reliability that competes with 100 other delegates?
This is yet another thread (and I now have the strong impression they are numerous) where rather important issues related to DPoS are not yet settled. BitShares is an experiment after all, and these discussions promote evolutionary refinements, and that's a good thing.
PoW has been around for a very long time compared to DPoS, so I am wondering for those of you who are PoW veterans how the DPoS state of the art compares with where Bitcoin was after it was in the wild and had a $25M - $70M marketcap.
I jumped into crytocurrencies directly with BitShares, so I would love to hear a comparative analysis from someone like BM or Andreaus Antonopolis to see whether our learning curve is faster, slower or about the same as it was for early PoW.
That is also an important question to help with our marketing, as well as it is for people deciding whether to get involved with BitShares. Sometimes I have a hard time thinking of our marketing as being directed to early adopters, tho that is the reality of where we're at currently.
It seems to me we still have some important questions to figure out about the practicalities of DPoS operation. I kindof wonder if BM in retrospect thinks having an earlier focus on building infrastructure to support choosing and maintaining delegates might have been a wise investment of developer time, infrastructure such as a reputation system and voting options.
And that brings to mind how difficult finding info is here on this forum. It has already been suggested we need a new forum structure, to separate major areas of concern such as core development, principles and philosophy, marketing, new users, investors, legal and regulatory.
When I look at the forum hierarchy it isn't that bad, but most of the discussions take place here in the general category rather than under more appropriate sections. It would probably take a lot of dedicated effort to monitor the discussions and move posts / threads around to keep things organized. I host a SMF forum for a very small community so I'm familiar with the database structure it uses. I would say a day or two of writing SQL queries would be adequate to create some tools to make moving things around pretty quick and easy. It still would require a human to make the judgment of how posts should be moved, so keeping the forum organized would require regular monitoring and moderation.