Some existing foreigner witnesses are going to support CN-Vote patch.

They will talk with CN-Vote directly

The patch is not a straight reversal of the voting system, it is something else and it looks less stringent to me than what abit did.

Full diff here
https://github.com/bitshares-cnvote/bitshares-core/compare/349e0061300d3e65a3e3040276c321b76069e44f...master

Diffrences are that staking will be reduced to x1 only.So each BTS will only hold 1 BTS VP.
Collateral voting will be disabled not after 60 days but 600 days.

When asked for the reason CN Vote explained that due to the short time and lack of funding to create a patch they reverse the added voting system by simply mainly changing parameters and not much code in fear to not destroy the compatibility of the patch as a full reverse would take more coding and time.

Giving that they had only 3 days without preparation and funding it is for me personly acceptable like for other foreign witnesses i'm in contact with.

The new voting system is poorly done.

Jumping from one shit into another.

Remembers me of dumb voters who always jump from one party to another in hope it gets better.


The stacking mechanism in current form is wrong

The biggest paradox is BTS is core token of our ecosystem.

This voting system is in decline with that function.

A member who has 1000 BTS and participates in the ecosystem to make Bitshares great has less voting power than somebody who has 1000 BTS and does nothing in ecosystem other than stacking and receiving up to 8 times the voting power of the guy who actually brings the ecosystem forward and income.

These stupid stacking ideas are all based on theory and academic bs.

You know why chinese won economic battle against US ?
Because US is and was leaaded by academic idiots who only know theory unable to forcast the result of their actions.
China had/has old currency traders living in reality knowing what will be the result when doing a or b and able to forcast years in forward based on their planned actions.

You guys clearly represent the US academics who have completly no clue what you get in the end result.




But you are free to explain to me where the additional value comes from
the one guy with 1000 BTS stacking when he is not going to participate in ecosystem.Where will the income come from ?

And the guy who is trading 1000 BTS and knows the ecosystem well and pays fee's to the network will be dictated/controlled by the other guy who knows it only theoraticly.


But the inactive guy is worth more as he is "willing to sacrifice their personal interests for the benefit of the community"
What exectly did he sacrifice ?Did he worked more for bitshares than the active trader ?


What an idiotic logic based on an one time price pump and not growth

 
You guys have now the opportunity to chose between horseshit1 and horseshit2 as voting system.




Somebody going to explain to me what BTS exectly represents  ?A blockchain with high acitivity including a populated dex or just a blockchain with no activity and no populated dex but pure speculation token for a pump ?

Feed the real bitcny price. There is no alternative solution.

Where was Abit or BEOS or co ?

Can't see them.They didn't needed cn-vote to get it fixed

Since some people claim Abit changed bitshares to the right direction .......


Did Abit delete his absuing bot on telegram and unban all DEV's and other people ?

Did Abit execute community will as committee ?

Did Abit listen to CN-Vote or other committee members other than bitcrab about the MM contest rules ?

Did Abit apolagize for his abuse ?

Did Abit gave up sole control over github ?

Did Abit distance from previous corruption he supported openly ?

Did Abit's point of view changed that abuse/cheats are ok as long it fits bitshares (in his private point of view)


Serious questions ?
Cause i can't see any changes at all

Quote from: Thul3 on August 11, 2020, 07:51:20 am

CN-Vote has only 250 million votes so blaming everything on them is wrong.BEOS is at least to be blamed the same making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers you claim to be important.
I will explain more in detail why i disagree tonight.

But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

You just see cn-vote have 250M VP now, but you didn't see the future, about BEOS, this is the choice of real bts holder not the debtor.

Quote

making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers

About this, any big proxy can't avoid the responsibility.

Quote

But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

About this question, i think i have give the answer, but you don't want to see, the Dev can't fork anything, only the witness can.

Quote

when someone gets to powerfull

This is a very interesting question, this is about the powerful come from where, come from the leveraged collateral or real bts? if this powerful come from the real bts, no one can fork it, even the witness.

If this powerful come from the leveraged collateral，then i have a question for you:

When the cn-vote have 650M leveraged collateral VP in the future(certainty event), and use this VP locking the feed price again, so what do you want to do with this? you want to make a same leveraged collateral VP to fight with them and what you did you want the other bts holder to do?

No the problem is i know BEOS.
BEOS is corrupt.Way more corrupt than CN-Vote.
Their community asked so many times to vote for something which they didn't.They preach A but do B.
Majority of foreigners hates BEOS.
BEOS comes to power you can trust me they will leave.
The 170 million votes left on BEOS are people who are mainly there to get some sort of benefit via rainfall not caring about bitshares voting at all.
BEOS did inside deals on bitshares destroying witnesses.They made the committee corrupt with inside deals.They never participated in any voting from themself.You always had to ask them to do something.CN-Vote was created because BEOS approved all workers making the dilution very high.They created workers which instantly failed already during funding.
If i had to chose between BEOS and CN-Vote i would ALWAYS chose CN-Vote.
People who know them for a longer time always write they leave a long tail of tears.

Also people are talking debotos bad.
A debtor is nothing bad.
He is long on BTS and more important in real world debtors get also voting rights.
The only thing which would need to be changed is bitassets getting protected from debtor votings in bad times.
However did you see BEOS supporting something like that other than just claiming ?
Did you see community willing to do something about it ?

Because i can tell you i tried a lot and to say the truth the majority gives a fuck even unwilling to take 2 minutes for a vote.



Committee is conntrolled by 2 entities.DPOS1 is the solution to it i proposed for a long time but not the way it was implemted.


Same rules apply to all about collateral.In real world collateral is also giving voting rights.

The current voting system change basicly punishes now being long on BTS via collateral and favorise paid votings rights via rainfall like at BEOS.

DL being a longterm partner of BEOS is the reason why he suppports these changes.
But this would end in a total centralization of bitshares.
Who is going to follow that ?

CN-Vote has only 250 million votes so blaming everything on them is wrong.BEOS is at least to be blamed the same making the deep corruption in committee even possible and blocking workers you claim to be important.
I will explain more in detail why i disagree tonight.

But one question.
Are Dev's going to fork everytime a new voting system when someone gets to powerfull they disagree with ?

Did Abit disagree with CN-Vote ?Am asking because he was always supportive to them and their actions,banning dev's who questioned some actions.
Was DL disagreeing with CN-Vote ?Cause i saw him claiming cn-vote to be wise and smart when getting his worker approved.
It seems he always blames chinese when his worker doesn't seem to get approved.


Has Abit and DL support of foreigners?

A clear no and majority of foreigners having anykind of influence on bitshares sees it as a hostile takeover but are silent as they belive both sides are not bringing bitshares forward

Quote from: Thul3 on August 10, 2020, 04:56:47 pm

You can also add that abit destroyed the main bitshares telegram channel by adding his bot and indirectly and directly banning people who
argued about his bad actions.He banned very active admins there who where nicely invested in BTS and made majority of people going silent there.Another part is now moving to digital lucifers chat where he is owner and these cheaters admins.

They are conditioning people there for their own agenda and doesn't allow any other opinion than theirs.


People myself included had been fighting abits one men show quite long.
He is definetly a good dev and very active however he should not be in committee because of his lack of ethics and economic understanding.His sole power in github already upset the old core team showing he thinks he have sole power over bitshares which haven't changed till today which is why cn-vote had to fork it.

I don't like and don't believe cn-vote more, in the future who will kill bts, that must be cn-vote, this time, i support abit, when the debtor have the power to control the lending system, then there didn't have lending system any more.

Accepting such a break in protocol that one persons decides about the chain is going only to lead that noone is going to put any money
into BTS anymore.It's far worse than BSIP76.
Today its about the voting system tomorrow he decides to change something else.

I also don't like many decissions of cn-vote as everyone could read it on the forum but breaking protocol in this way is far worse in my opinion.

dear all,the yesterdays removal of votes from cnvote supporting openledger-dc witness makes it impossible to cover costs in near future of support of well known nodes like nuremberg and explorer bitsharescan.they will close as the month server fee expire unless its voted back