Your forum registration is broken. Do you sign up somewhere else?

We should hold a theme creation challenge/contest, it's pretty much just picking 20 colours. Lesson learned - you need to provide translations to new themes in the dropdown menu.
BTS Web Wallet Dank edition, now with 200% airhorns. 420. Doritos.

Lock away the 1mil BTS in a smart contract, deduct x BTS for every missed block?

Quote from: crypto123 on January 18, 2017, 01:36:29 pm

Quote from: abit on November 24, 2016, 11:46:12 pm

Quote from: crypto123 on November 23, 2016, 11:18:41 pm

Quick update regarding the 'GRIDCOIN' MPA - The Gridcoin price fluctuated, triggered a black swan state and the asset has been stuck in said state ever since: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22733.msg299091.html#msg299091

It has however opened the door to new developments by PC regarding MPA resiliency to black swan events. Once these new changes are in effect, the Gridcoin community will reactivate the market pegged asset, requiring more witnesses to produce the price feed.

Prior to the black swan event we only had 2 or 3 witnesses out of 25 (27?), whilst changing the witness count may be a dangerous idea the concept of vote weight degradation over time for witnesses and committee members is still sound.

What does everyone think?

I do think a UIA fits more in Gridcoin's situation, perhaps with a special owner/committee like the STEALTH asset (check https://cryptofresh.com/u/stealth-mgmt , the owner is a multi-sig account, automatically controlled by top 5 holders)

We've already got an EBA (OPEN.GRC), issuing an UIA would inflate the GRC coinsupply (unlikely to fly with the GRC network unless we burnt GRC before project-raining an GRC UIA).
We're waiting for the blackswan hardening features to be implemented within BTS early this year, when the changes are implemented we will revive the GRIDCOIN MPA even if it's risky.

This is off topic though, back to the main point - vote degradation!

People are talking about increasing the block rewards for witnesses to encourage more active/productive witnesses: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23702.0.html

Surely degrading votes over say 4-6 months would encourage witnesses to continuously campaign for their positions and open the door for new witnesses to potentially gain power?

Getting witnesses to add price feeds for the GRIDCOIN MPA was like pulling teeth  - witnesses should be far more active & inactivity should have consequences, even if their witness node is healthy.

I think vote degradation may be a problem if there isn't a ton of voter participation to begin with.  Also, I think @pc made a good argument against degradation earlier in the thread.

By the way, I wonder if witnesses have been reluctant to offer price feeds for Gridcoin MPA because they think MPA is the wrong way to go.  I tend to agree with that.  A cryptocuyrrency is not the best use case for an MPA, especially an MPA that will have difficult gaining liquidity.  Why not issue a UIA?  You could get rid of your blockchain and replace the coins with a committee-controlled UIA.  Then you could focus on maintaining/developing your BOINC software rather then futzing around with a blockchain, which has nothing to do with your core competency.   Anyway, just my 2 cents.

If there's not a ton of voter participation to begin with then surely DPOS is not an effective mechanism for voting witnesses into/out of power? Currently witnesses are voted in and unless they turn malicious/incompetent they never lose their position, thus competition stalls and witnesses contribute the minimum required of their role. By introducing vote degradation(over a long time say 6 months), witnesses would have to at least post an update once in a while to show they're still alive in the community. It'd revitalize the democratic aspect of DPOS.

Should it really be up to witnesses to make decisions that prevent alternative cryptocurrencies from utilizing the full features of bitshares? If it was like pulling teeth for GRC, will all other alternative cryptocurrencies face opposition from these individuals? Surely we want as many assets being traded on the DEX as possible, no? Had we never attempted the MPA, BTS would not be pursuing improvments to blackswan handling: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/216 This'd have been far worse if it had affected bitUSD.

I've mentioned in previous posts why we won't be pursuing an UIA. Gridcoin is a seperate community & project from BOINC, we do not contribute towards its development and by issuing an UIA for BOINC computation we would be introducing centralization where there is currently decentralization. There will certainly be BOINC UIAs issued in the future (project rain), but GRC will not be migrating to an UIA.

Edit: Relevant github issue: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/29

Quote from: crypto123 on January 17, 2017, 10:16:02 am

I hope to add in new drop-down menus to the right of 'Deposit/Withdraw', linking to the other web wallets (OpenLedger, FreedomLedger, BTSABC, etc) and to BOINC/BTS/Gridcoin community links. The *.JSX is a tad confusing though..

I think (but not sure) something similar to this should work:
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/blob/master/web/app/components/Layout/Header.jsx#L227
It can be used later somewhere in return (line 246).

Cool, I'll try getting this to work this weekend. I also need to uplift the customizations to the latest BTS GUI release.

Edit: Merged in the latest bitshares ui changes

Quote from: crypto123 on November 23, 2016, 11:18:41 pm

Quick update regarding the 'GRIDCOIN' MPA - The Gridcoin price fluctuated, triggered a black swan state and the asset has been stuck in said state ever since: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22733.msg299091.html#msg299091

It has however opened the door to new developments by PC regarding MPA resiliency to black swan events. Once these new changes are in effect, the Gridcoin community will reactivate the market pegged asset, requiring more witnesses to produce the price feed.

Prior to the black swan event we only had 2 or 3 witnesses out of 25 (27?), whilst changing the witness count may be a dangerous idea the concept of vote weight degradation over time for witnesses and committee members is still sound.

What does everyone think?

I do think a UIA fits more in Gridcoin's situation, perhaps with a special owner/committee like the STEALTH asset (check https://cryptofresh.com/u/stealth-mgmt , the owner is a multi-sig account, automatically controlled by top 5 holders)

We've already got an EBA (OPEN.GRC), issuing an UIA would inflate the GRC coinsupply (unlikely to fly with the GRC network unless we burnt GRC before project-raining an GRC UIA).
We're waiting for the blackswan hardening features to be implemented within BTS early this year, when the changes are implemented we will revive the GRIDCOIN MPA even if it's risky.

This is off topic though, back to the main point - vote degredation!

People are talking about increasing the block rewards for witnesses to encourage more active/productive witnesses: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23702.0.html

Surely degrading votes over say 4-6 months would encourage witnesses to continuously campaign for their positions and open the door for new witnesses to potentially gain power?

Getting witnesses to add price feeds for the GRIDCOIN MPA was like pulling teeth  - witnesses should be far more active & inactivity should have consequences, even if their witness node is healthy.

We should be holding such a poll using followmyvote's tech + the BTS asset, rather than a manipulatable forum poll.

I object to witnesses being paid more. If developers/witnesses wish to be paid for developing some new service, they should raise a worker proposal.

I think that witness votes should degrade over time so that witnesses have to regularly campaign for their positions (or at least acknowledge the community's existence every once in a while) & to provide new prospective witnesses the ability to be voted into power.

I think the peerplay's dividends feature for UIA would be pretty cool, I'd love the ability to create an UIA that had a customizable interest rate.

I don't think that we should start charging higher fees to reward holders, if we want this we should revert back to 'earn 5% on anything' because that was a huge selling point for BTSX.