BitShares Forum
Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: iHashFury on July 30, 2014, 09:06:52 am
-
There are lots of greedy delegates out there. :o
Get a better return with one of the following:
ihashfury 6% ;D
wallet_approve_delegate ihashfury
perks 11% :D
wallet_approve_delegate perks
perky 36 % ;)
wallet_approve_delegate perky
-
What is your motivation to not even be break even? Without the asset registration fees, no one is making money. I'm not sure why you would call anyone greedy with the current rate of pay being so low.
What are you doing besides saving people 0.0005 dollars a day ? (I made up that number, but I doubt it is off by much...)
-
I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.
Lets see how the post below progresses:
Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410)
-
Ok maybe pay rates under 50% is to low right now but I suggest nobody to have pay rates above 80%
It looks really greedy even if it is not! ;)
just my 2 BTSX :)
-
Ok maybe pay rates under 50% is to low right now but I suggest nobody to have pay rates above 80%
It looks really greedy even if it is not! ;)
just my 2 BTSX :)
Hah! In politics perception is everything :) .
-
I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.
Lets see how the post below progresses:
Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410)
Who isn't in this for the long run? Do you not think the market will adapt when the money actually matters ?
What were you contributing before ? Why didn't we hear much from you previously?
I see 3 posts from you at the top of this forum. You're pretty much spamming the board and calling everyone else greedy.
You contribute far less in "savings" than someone like happypatty, svk (sp?), or alt contributes. It isn't even comparable.
At your cost you are probably just completely centralized.
-
I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.
Lets see how the post below progresses:
Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410)
Who isn't in this for the long run? Do you not think the market will adapt when the money actually matters ?
What were you contributing before ? Why didn't we hear much from you previously?
I see 3 posts from you at the top of this forum. You're pretty much spamming the board and calling everyone else greedy.
You contribute far less in "savings" than someone like happypatty, svk (sp?), or alt contributes. It isn't even comparable.
At your cost you are probably just completely centralized.
I prefer to listen/read and then post an opinion to see what happens.
3 post = spam?
Ok maybe pay rates under 50% is to low right now but I suggest nobody to have pay rates above 80%
It looks really greedy even if it is not! ;)
just my 2 BTSX :)
Hah! In politics perception is everything :) .
Very true.
-
Hah! this is going to get interesting.. :P
-
I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.
Lets see how the post below progresses:
Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410)
Who isn't in this for the long run? Do you not think the market will adapt when the money actually matters ?
What were you contributing before ? Why didn't we hear much from you previously?
I see 3 posts from you at the top of this forum. You're pretty much spamming the board and calling everyone else greedy.
You contribute far less in "savings" than someone like happypatty, svk (sp?), or alt contributes. It isn't even comparable.
At your cost you are probably just completely centralized.
For the record I am not even running a delegate. My plan is to create tools that people appreciate and help offset the costs.
(btw, I am currently running at a loss, but that's OK, because I still learn in the process)
-
3 post = spam?
You made 3 completely different threads which basically all had the same content. That you are operating below cost/others are greedy.
Why don't you tell us how much in USD you are saving someone with a 1 million BTSX stake ?
It is hard enough to keep up with everything. What makes you think that you deserve 3 threads to choke the forum with repetitive ads ? Do you think this is a good approach for everyone to take in our community ?
-
3 post = spam?
You made 3 completely different threads which basically all had the same content. That you are operating below cost/others are greedy.
Why don't you tell us how much in USD you are saving someone with a 1 million BTSX stake ?
It is hard enough to keep up with everything. What makes you think that you deserve 3 threads to choke the forum with repetitive ads ? Do you think this is a good approach for everyone to take in our community ?
If my comments/posts/opinions are not relevant and of no use to the community - moderator feel free to delete
-
3 post = spam?
You made 3 completely different threads which basically all had the same content. That you are operating below cost/others are greedy.
Why don't you tell us how much in USD you are saving someone with a 1 million BTSX stake ?
It is hard enough to keep up with everything. What makes you think that you deserve 3 threads to choke the forum with repetitive ads ? Do you think this is a good approach for everyone to take in our community ?
If my comments/posts/opinions are not relevant and of no use to the community - moderator feel free to delete
It would be nice if you would attempt to answer my questions instead of just calling other delegates greedy.
I don't think most moderators really want to be in a position to make such a judgement call, so we rely on community a bit to police ourselves.
-
Hello
You made 3 completely different threads which basically all had the same content. That you are operating below cost/others are greedy.
In my opinion, the point of this tread is to highlight that there are greedy delegates. There are also delegates providing valuable services. The community is voting, in my opinion, correctly as the average pay rate has now reduced from ~90 to ~80%.
The Node6 thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410) is to allow users to post their ≤ 6% node details.
I have removed my original post.
Why don't you tell us how much in USD you are saving someone with a 1 million BTSX stake ?
I alone cannot make savings for a 1 million BTSX stake holder but these two threads should promote a much leaner system by increasing the burn rate and returning profits to all stake holders.
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Bitshares_X#Delegate_Burn_Rate_to_realize_profits (http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Bitshares_X#Delegate_Burn_Rate_to_realize_profits)
Reducing the supply of BTSX is economically equivalent to dividing the transaction fees among all holders of BTSX proportional to their ownership.
-
Hello
You made 3 completely different threads which basically all had the same content. That you are operating below cost/others are greedy.
In my opinion, the point of this tread is to highlight that there are greedy delegates. There are also delegates providing valuable services. The community is voting, in my opinion, correctly as the average pay rate has now reduced from ~90 to ~80%.
The Node6 thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410) is to allow users to post their ≤ 6% node details.
I have removed my original post.
Why don't you tell us how much in USD you are saving someone with a 1 million BTSX stake ?
I alone cannot make savings for a 1 million BTSX stake holder but these two threads should promote a much leaner system by increasing the burn rate and returning profits to all stake holders.
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Bitshares_X#Delegate_Burn_Rate_to_realize_profits (http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Bitshares_X#Delegate_Burn_Rate_to_realize_profits)
Reducing the supply of BTSX is economically equivalent to dividing the transaction fees among all holders of BTSX proportional to their ownership.
It is not correct to call people greedy when they're really not even breaking even on their time/VPS cost. When the money actually becomes significant to any meaningful degree, then market forces will kick in. If delegates are providing no value then they will be removed. Pushing for such a really low rate at this point is doing nothing but inviting centralization.
Value from someone who actually is a contributing member will vastly outweigh what you are burning at this point. It is not even close.
Thank you for the wiki link. I guess maybe should go read that ....
-
I think all delegates are vastly underpaid at this point in time.
I hope to increase fees to increase delegate compensation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
5% inflation would make 1 million dollars a year at 20 million market cap,
1 million divided by 101 delegates ~= 10 000 dollars
haters gonna hate
-
As transaction/block size increases the delegates will probably have to ramp up their hardware/vps implementations. I can't imagine that ever costing close to $1k/month....but who knows what the future holds. I guess with someone like me, at 5% pay, it would be much less and probably closer to the actual cost of hosting a delegate.
-
As transaction/block size increases the delegates will probably have to ramp up their hardware/vps implementations. I can't imagine that ever costing close to $1k/month....but who knows what the future holds. I guess with someone like me, at 5% pay, it would be much less and probably closer to the actual cost of hosting a delegate.
There will be people like me who is able to donate very beefy dedicated hardware and fast internet for free, my delegate pay will be 100% donated. I run several full nodes for Bitcoin too.
-
As transaction/block size increases the delegates will probably have to ramp up their hardware/vps implementations. I can't imagine that ever costing close to $1k/month....but who knows what the future holds. I guess with someone like me, at 5% pay, it would be much less and probably closer to the actual cost of hosting a delegate.
There will be people like me who is able to donate very beefy dedicated hardware and fast internet for free, my delegate pay will be 100% donated. I run several full nodes for Bitcoin too.
Ballers gonna Ball 8)
+5%
-
I think all delegates are vastly underpaid at this point in time.
I hope to increase fees to increase delegate compensation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
increasing fees is a centralized approach, is there a way to set up a market or decentralized approach? For example, delegates should have a mechanism to control payrates both up and down in a way that is transparent in order to respond to market forces.
-
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
I do a small math last night. the cost for renting a 2 cores and 4GB ram with 60GB SSD cloud server is around 0.06/hr to 0.14 usd/hr. the monthly cost is from 45USD+tax% to 105USD+tax% depend on which provider you are using and which part of world you are living, the sales tax for me is around 15% . Ideally ,each delegate can produce 750hrX3600S/10s/101= 2673btsx/mo. Based one current btsx price (less than 0.01usd),each delegate need to pay around 30 to 80 dollars per month to keep their position. I enjoy to be a delegate not only because believing BM's view but also enjoying to play with technologies and helping kids in high school to learn bitshares.
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
As transaction/block size increases the delegates will probably have to ramp up their hardware/vps implementations. I can't imagine that ever costing close to $1k/month....but who knows what the future holds. I guess with someone like me, at 5% pay, it would be much less and probably closer to the actual cost of hosting a delegate.
There was hope that the fees would be turned into value outside of just straightforward profit realization. This is part of the problem with bitcoin. 10% inflation goes strictly to security but none of that is aimed at development or marketing. With delegate system this could be quite different.
This is why I take exception to calling others greedy. A lot of people have given a lot of time to the project. For someone to come around who appears to have not previously participated and call others "greedy" over setting their pay rate to get $1 a day is laughable. Actually I think it is quite counter-productive towards the Bitshares X network.
-
Ideally ,each delegate can produce 750hrX3600S/10s/101= 2673btsx/mo. Based one current btsx price (less than 0.01usd),each delegate need to pay around 30 to 80 dollars per month to keep their position.
Considering what I sometimes spend on beer in a month, especially if that is in beer gardens and other trendy hangouts, I feel this is money well spent. If nothing else than to say I was part of a revolution 8) . Sure I've got some skin in the game and hope to pad my retirement a bit but mostly I'd like to be able to say, "I helped make that happen" 20 years from now.
-
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Great! So delegates get two knobs:
1) Fees accepted
2) % of fees that are destroyed
This is another economics/game theory problem (you can write a book on this delegate game):
1) If there is no limitation to block size, delegates should accept any fee >0. A delegate gains nothing by turning down a fee. A delegate that turns down a fee is essentially just paying the next person in line a tip. So the first knob won't do anything. However, if there is a universal limit on blocksize, every delegate will accept the largest fee per byte transaction first.
2) The second knob is more powerful, but is currently broken. In order for the % fees destroyed to reach an efficient market equilibrium, they must be allowed to go both up and down. Otherwise, the market will not be efficient and delegates will be incentived to damage the network in the event of a flash drop in price. Even though you would hope delegates should not do that based on moral grounds, the existence of such an incentive is a sign of a broken system.
I don't care about anything now since we're talking about pennies here, but I really want this system to be able to be robust in the future. My analysis keeps pointing to serious problems playing out later on which we can fix now and head off. I don't care if people are greedy at the moment, but we should really think about this economic system and if this is what we want going forward.
-
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Great! So delegates get two knobs:
1) Fees accepted
2) % of fees that are destroyed
This is another economics/game theory problem (you can write a book on this delegate game):
1) If there is no limitation to block size, delegates should accept any fee >0. A delegate gains nothing by turning down a fee. A delegate that turns down a fee is essentially just paying the next person in line a tip. So the first knob won't do anything. However, if there is a universal limit on blocksize, every delegate will accept the largest fee per byte transaction first.
The delegates are paid the average fee per round. So there would be no tip passed on to anyone else except the average on the next round if someone accepts the transaction on the next round. AFAIK.
-
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
users can set the fee? I always paid 0.1 btsx on transfer, how to set the fee?
-
help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee] Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Parameters:
fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set
Returns:
asset
aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee
-
help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee] Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Parameters:
fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set
Returns:
asset
aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee
Looks like the client will enforce the fee, when I set the fee to 0.001, the client will tell me "RPC error: insufficient fee"
-
help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee] Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Parameters:
fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set
Returns:
asset
aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee
Looks like the client will enforce the fee, when I set the fee to 0.001, the client will tell me "RPC error: insufficient fee"
This is a bug that needs to be tracked down.
-
I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.
Lets see how the post below progresses:
Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410)
Who isn't in this for the long run? Do you not think the market will adapt when the money actually matters ?
What were you contributing before ? Why didn't we hear much from you previously?
I see 3 posts from you at the top of this forum. You're pretty much spamming the board and calling everyone else greedy.
You contribute far less in "savings" than someone like happypatty, svk (sp?), or alt contributes. It isn't even comparable.
At your cost you are probably just completely centralized.
For the record I am not even running a delegate. My plan is to create tools that people appreciate and help offset the costs.
(btw, I am currently running at a loss, but that's OK, because I still learn in the process)
At this stage, unfortunately just about anyone who isnt operating at a loss is "centralized". It was no different in the early stages of bitcoin mining. The only difference here is that with DPOS, delegates are competing with one another to produce the most value for the ecosystem long term. Trust earned early on will pay off very well later on.
-
One could make the case that I, at 5% income, am the greedy one. Let me explain as perhaps I've misunderstood the economics.
As a delegate my income is based off transaction fees. The lower the pay rate that I take the higher fees I'd need to break even which would cost our customers more since they're the ones paying the transaction fees.
On the other hand lets assume I own a million BTSX. I am much better served by increasing the value of those million BTSX than I am by collecting transaction fees from issuing blocks. So I set my pay really low to destroy the most shares while still attracting votes.
What appears at first as non greedy is really self serving.
Disclosure: I do not own even close to a million BTSX :-\
-
Thats a good point. if delegates can only destroy shares and not create then running a 0% node is greedy!
Has there been any discussions re: delegates being allowed to create shares as well as destroying them? a somewhat elastic supply vs a deflationary supply might be a good thing?
-
It is not correct to call people greedy when they're really not even breaking even on their time/VPS cost. When the money actually becomes significant to any meaningful degree, then market forces will kick in. If delegates are providing no value then they will be removed. Pushing for such a really low rate at this point is doing nothing but inviting centralization.
Most budget VPS are rather godawful. Most VPS in general are pretty crap as application servers (obv if you're paying like $80 a month for something on linode, that wouldn't be true).
I have i7-3930 with 64GB of RAM w/ Intel EXPI9301CT NIC, which is usually what I use for bitcoind or p2pool or anything like that... that or an i7-4770 or e3-1240v3 with 32GB of RAM. This way you can keep everything on ramfs partition?
the bitcoind blocks can burst it up to 100MB/s w/ hundreds of clients requesting it simultaneously. ive had this running for a while and dont think ive seen over 200kb/s
oh, and,
Peer 106.5.241.47:52856 disconnected us: You offered me a list of more sync blocks than could possibly exist
i get that every 10 or 15 minutes
-
There really aren't any users yet. The only transactions are voting, exchange transfers, and playing around by mostly the folks on this forum. That'll all change soon...
-
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not? i'm a bit confused as to their purpose. is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch? i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?
-
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not? i'm a bit confused as to their purpose. is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch? i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?
Can you show me proof of this? I am genuinely interested..
-
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not? i'm a bit confused as to their purpose. is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch? i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?
Can you show me proof of this? I am genuinely interested..
Based off some old list that showed who held the most PTS. There's probably some site out there that shows the top holders? shrug.. I don't imagine it's changed *too* much
Voting is weighted based on # of coins, correct? that would inevitably lead to a handful of people controlling the 'delegates', great deal if you like the good old boy system
-
oh, I am gonna shut my node down also, it maxed out at around 90 peers, running 82 right now. is there some chart somewhere that shows propagation times, ala http://bitcoinstats.com/network/propagation/ ? that was fun to mess with.
was experimenting with it in late march and it coincided with some 30% drop on transaction propagation times for the days I put 'em up. started full time in mid-may. bitcoin.sipa.org/seeds.txt is more like 2 1/2 to 3 months, not 30d, lol.
was running four, but now just 5.9.24.81 full-time
if this is anything like bitcoin, peers with crap upstream clog the whole system... i could run bitcoind on my home connection (768kbps upstream) and when blockchain.info reported that i found a block ""first"", my upstream would be saturated for a good 3-5 minutes & essentially all from just the new block requests (used tcpkill on anyone trying to DL blockchain from me). i have timeout set to 100ms now to avoid as many of the home users as possible, makes it much smoother
-
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not? i'm a bit confused as to their purpose. is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch? i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?
Can you show me proof of this? I am genuinely interested..
Based off some old list that showed who held the most PTS. There's probably some site out there that shows the top holders? shrug.. I don't imagine it's changed *too* much
Voting is weighted based on # of coins, correct? that would inevitably lead to a handful of people controlling the 'delegates', great deal if you like the good old boy system
There's really only so much a delegate can do. So even if a lot of the votes are controlled by a few "old boys" they still don't have much power.