If this delegate does not get voted in within, say, 2 weeks, we'll know that the current governance model does not represent shareholder intent.

delegate-proposal-proxy-test.misc.nikolai
(1% pay, but I'll take him offline as soon as he is voted in)

BM and I have gone back and forth, with me claiming we need to get proposal-based governance online ASAP and him arguing that delegates provide a good-enough proxy since shareholders can always use a "poll" delegate. BM claims it would add voter complexity, but I think that's wrong. It is much much easier to analyze self-contained proposals with their own UX than it is to find and analyze various delegate bids. It is also qualitatively different to think about a proposal when it is presented as "shareholders need your input on this yes/no question right now".

It would require no changes to the protocol (it can be hacked in using non-delegate-accounts + burn features, more on this when it's relevant) and minimal changes to the user interface. It can and should wait for after 1.0 even though it could be offloaded entirely to someone like svk if we really wanted and BM probably could have done it in the time he's been working on prediction market stuff.

If you think I'm wrong, arguing in this thread is meaningless, PROVE IT by voting that guy in.

edit:
"So you want shareholders to vote this del. in if they think delegate based polls are adequate and not vote him in if the want  proposal-based governance? "
Yes, this is what I meant. IF delegate-based proposals are "good enough" then shareholders should confirm that they think so.

Cryptohedge will need this for when we do the sharedrop on CFSGOLD. Scan for every address that holds the asset ID, and then send them CFSCOIN accordingly. So I hope there will be some way to do this relatively easily, and it would be even more awesome if bitsharesblocks could just make lists of it so anyone can easily do these kind of sharedrop promotions. It could even be used for manual dividend payments - if you specify some minimum limit of UIA an address needs to hold before it can receive any dividend then it will be very efficient as long as it doesnt happen too often.

The other option for sharedropping on UIA holders is to have a bot that you can send e.g. your CFSGOLD to, which then returns a new UIA that represents CFSGOLD post sharedrop (CFSGOLD1 or something) and then CFSCOIN.

Working on this exact thing for the NOTE distribution right now

Don't spend bter points on this, they're already adding it.

Quote from: bytemaster on February 04, 2015, 07:40:39 pm

Quote from: Ander on February 04, 2015, 07:35:59 pm

Quote from: bytemaster on February 04, 2015, 07:26:16 pm

I think a super majority of a slate of judges would do the trick.

I agree.  How many judges would we need?

Would they be delegates, or something new?

Any set of accounts defined in advance.  Any number up to 110.

Going with a judge slate, I imagine your looking for something that is just good enough for now.  Would you be against implementing this pm using lmsr?  It was originally proposed by Robert hanson and eliminates the need for a bid ask table (the beauty is a trader won't have to wait for another person to take the other side of the trade), thus a simplifying and reducing the amount of work you have to do.  Additionally it will allow you to do non-binomial pm's of any degree.  Instead of having a yes or no question of will republicans win greater than 65 seats in the house, it instead could be phrased how many seats will republicans win in the next election. 

Take a look at the excel.

https://github.com/psztorc/Truthcoin/blob/master/docs/LogMSR_Demo.xlsx






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I keep trying to push this but BM is against this because it's "too complicated". If I can't change his mind I will make a fork to include it. I think it is much simpler because it is a well-defined state machine with a single transition function.


(start of lsmr in current develop: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/blob/6d42fcab803983ec16f9ec094a71fa2078febad3/libraries/blockchain/include/bts/blockchain/lsmr_record.hpp

we can also copy the working lsmr impelmentation from TC's repo)

I'll publish feeds when I get around to making a UNIQUE feed script. Running another copy of alt's or xeroc's scripts adds no extra security (negative security due to false perceived security?) but makes me feel "done" with that task.

Why not just make a normal PM with normal scoring rules that resolve from m-of-n feeds?

Since this whole discussion is for hypothetical post-1.0 features, I don't see what we gain from a partial solution which will give worse results

This is just the snapshot made liquid. Nobody has decided to make it on BTS yet. That will only be done if NOTE's can *definitely* capture income from music-related transactions, which we have no reason to believe right now.

Don't panic...