0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: cass on November 05, 2014, 07:41:08 pmQuote from: Agent86 on November 05, 2014, 06:49:36 pmQuote from: Riverhead on November 05, 2014, 06:19:31 pmAs a counter point consider this:1) svk has clearly demonstrated he can produce a great product and is cautious but not unfriendly to the open source concept.2) svk has demonstrated a long standing and unflagging commitment to BitShares.What does he get for this? A pay rate that starts at 80% - 100% rather than, "Start at 10% and if your work looks good campaign a new delegate at a higher rate".IMHO his compensation for past work is paid out over the time it would take an unknown developer to get from 0% - 10% up to 80% - 100%.I guess my feeling is that even if svk said "hey guys I'm moving on with other things in life and won't be working on bitsharesblocks anymore" and said he would open source it and hand it off to someone who wanted to takeover. Even now we know he won't be working on it anymore and we have the source I think we should STILL do what we can to provide fair compensation for past work. Because of fairness and because of the effect on anyone else that might be considering putting in time to help this community. I think it's a good precedent and we have a unique ability to centralize funds on behalf of shareholders instead of just tipping. svk you have my vote !!! Really great work so far … btw did you get the chance to start with our project… we talked last week!? Just curious cheers. I haven't had much time yet I'm afraid, I'm out of town until Friday but I'll try to find some time this weekend, and if not then next week!
Quote from: Agent86 on November 05, 2014, 06:49:36 pmQuote from: Riverhead on November 05, 2014, 06:19:31 pmAs a counter point consider this:1) svk has clearly demonstrated he can produce a great product and is cautious but not unfriendly to the open source concept.2) svk has demonstrated a long standing and unflagging commitment to BitShares.What does he get for this? A pay rate that starts at 80% - 100% rather than, "Start at 10% and if your work looks good campaign a new delegate at a higher rate".IMHO his compensation for past work is paid out over the time it would take an unknown developer to get from 0% - 10% up to 80% - 100%.I guess my feeling is that even if svk said "hey guys I'm moving on with other things in life and won't be working on bitsharesblocks anymore" and said he would open source it and hand it off to someone who wanted to takeover. Even now we know he won't be working on it anymore and we have the source I think we should STILL do what we can to provide fair compensation for past work. Because of fairness and because of the effect on anyone else that might be considering putting in time to help this community. I think it's a good precedent and we have a unique ability to centralize funds on behalf of shareholders instead of just tipping. svk you have my vote !!! Really great work so far … btw did you get the chance to start with our project… we talked last week!? Just curious
Quote from: Riverhead on November 05, 2014, 06:19:31 pmAs a counter point consider this:1) svk has clearly demonstrated he can produce a great product and is cautious but not unfriendly to the open source concept.2) svk has demonstrated a long standing and unflagging commitment to BitShares.What does he get for this? A pay rate that starts at 80% - 100% rather than, "Start at 10% and if your work looks good campaign a new delegate at a higher rate".IMHO his compensation for past work is paid out over the time it would take an unknown developer to get from 0% - 10% up to 80% - 100%.I guess my feeling is that even if svk said "hey guys I'm moving on with other things in life and won't be working on bitsharesblocks anymore" and said he would open source it and hand it off to someone who wanted to takeover. Even now we know he won't be working on it anymore and we have the source I think we should STILL do what we can to provide fair compensation for past work. Because of fairness and because of the effect on anyone else that might be considering putting in time to help this community. I think it's a good precedent and we have a unique ability to centralize funds on behalf of shareholders instead of just tipping.
As a counter point consider this:1) svk has clearly demonstrated he can produce a great product and is cautious but not unfriendly to the open source concept.2) svk has demonstrated a long standing and unflagging commitment to BitShares.What does he get for this? A pay rate that starts at 80% - 100% rather than, "Start at 10% and if your work looks good campaign a new delegate at a higher rate".IMHO his compensation for past work is paid out over the time it would take an unknown developer to get from 0% - 10% up to 80% - 100%.
if you want more Vote,i thinke translate to chinese is very importent.
delegate (locked) >>> help wallet_burn Usage:wallet_burn <amount_to_transfer> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous] Burns given amount to the given account. This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.Burns given amount to the given account. This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.Parameters: amount_to_transfer (real_amount, required): the amount of shares to transfer asset_symbol (asset_symbol, required): the asset to transfer from_account_name (sending_account_name, required): the source account to draw the shares from for_or_against (string, required): the value 'for' or 'against' to_account_name (receive_account_name, required): the account to which the burn should be credited (for or against) and on which the public message will appear public_message (string, optional, defaults to ""): a public message to post anonymous (bool, optional, defaults to "false"): true if anonymous, else signed by from_account_nameReturns: transaction_recordaliases: burn
This will all be so much easier once we have a turing script that takes delegates pay, exchanges the pay into a fix amount of bitUSD and automatically burns the rest ..
Quote from: gamey on November 05, 2014, 06:46:30 pmHow much is 10%? Starting a new delegate is a bit silly. People will always be dragging their feet as they're voted out. You're just adding steps that don't need to be there to prevent the issue at the start. These people aren't paid monthly. It is hard enough to keep track of everything. Voting people in/out according to raises sucks.Exactly my point. I'm not against compensating svk, he's more than earned it, I was just raising a counter point for discussion. But if twl joined and shared some links that showed pages he'd supposedly developed would we be OK voting him in at 80% to 100% straight away with the assumption we could somehow compel him to lower his rate later if his work was sub par? I guess that's the big question.
How much is 10%? Starting a new delegate is a bit silly. People will always be dragging their feet as they're voted out. You're just adding steps that don't need to be there to prevent the issue at the start. These people aren't paid monthly. It is hard enough to keep track of everything. Voting people in/out according to raises sucks.
I want to say that I totally disagree with this philosophy/attitude. Why shouldn't we compensate svk for past work?We are going to ask him to open source his work and then tell him he deserves no compensation for his past work except a pat on the back, and then ask what else can he do for us? Just because the work is done so maybe he doesn't have much "room to negotiate"? I think it's a bad attitude that serves to discourage others from freely contributing and shows a lack of appreciation.Do we want to reward results or just "work"? I'd rather reward and encourage results.These systems codify a "fair" or socially agreed distribution of stake. I think to get "buy in" we should cultivate a sense of fairness. I think it is ridiculous to expect people will contribute anything of significance if we take this attitude and I think it encourages competition. I'm not saying we reward things of questionable value but bitsharesblocks was a legit contribution.
We are going to ask him to open source his work and then tell him he deserves no compensation for his past work except a pat on the back, and then ask what else can he do for us? Just because the work is done so maybe he doesn't have much "room to negotiate"? I think it's a bad attitude that serves to discourage others from freely contributing and shows a lack of appreciation.Do we want to reward results or just "work"? I'd rather reward and encourage results.These systems codify a "fair" or socially agreed distribution of stake. I think to get "buy in" we should cultivate a sense of fairness. I think it is ridiculous to expect people will contribute anything of significance if we take this attitude and I think it encourages competition. I'm not saying we reward things of questionable value but bitsharesblocks was a legit contribution.
Quote from: alphaBar on November 03, 2014, 05:37:35 pmI hate to be "that guy" but I want to point out that delegate pay should probably not be treated as a reward for "past" work (although that can help to establish the trust that you need to get "hired" initially). I think of your past work as your resume for getting the job. In order to be voted in you should publish a list of projects or features that you'd like to implement, budget, timeline, and key results. Then once you are voted in you should commit to regular status updates, milestones, metrics, open source development, and anything else you can do to give shareholders confidence that they are getting their money's worth.Lastly I'll just say that this is one of the main pitfalls of the dilution proposal. Personally I think the threshold for ongoing performance evaluation and management is too high for the average stakeholder. We already have very low vote participation, and the only thing we're managing is block production. What will inevitably happen is that people will trust their votes to third parties who have the time and expertise to evaluate the performance of a given delegate. Those people then become yet another "layer" of separation from the stakeholders, which in turn potentially impacts security since we've conflated the rewards for block production and literally everything else the "company" does. /rantI agree, if you want my vote there needs be a roadmap for future work and not compensation for past work. It is a complex system and an experiment... I think that major stake holders will act to get things done.
I hate to be "that guy" but I want to point out that delegate pay should probably not be treated as a reward for "past" work (although that can help to establish the trust that you need to get "hired" initially). I think of your past work as your resume for getting the job. In order to be voted in you should publish a list of projects or features that you'd like to implement, budget, timeline, and key results. Then once you are voted in you should commit to regular status updates, milestones, metrics, open source development, and anything else you can do to give shareholders confidence that they are getting their money's worth.Lastly I'll just say that this is one of the main pitfalls of the dilution proposal. Personally I think the threshold for ongoing performance evaluation and management is too high for the average stakeholder. We already have very low vote participation, and the only thing we're managing is block production. What will inevitably happen is that people will trust their votes to third parties who have the time and expertise to evaluate the performance of a given delegate. Those people then become yet another "layer" of separation from the stakeholders, which in turn potentially impacts security since we've conflated the rewards for block production and literally everything else the "company" does. /rant
Quote from: bytemaster on November 03, 2014, 05:02:35 pmI would support you for a paid position assuming you commit to a certain level of effort that continually enhances bitsharesblocks and makes bitsharesblocks open source (if it isn't already). The role of bitsharesblocks will have to expand as we add support for light weight clients that need RPC query access for information.I would like to move the source for bitsharesblocks to github.com/BitShares/ One thing I really want to see for a bit asset is the cumulative total of bitassets required to cover by a certain number of days. This will let traders know how much volume of cover pressure or "future buy demand" there existsI would definitely look to keep supporting and expanding BitsharesBlocks and will be happy to add support for light weight clients. I've been asked before to make it open source and I've been mulling over the question. On one hand I'm attracted to the whole idea of open-source software, on the other hand I'm a little intimated by the whole thing and also skeptical/worried that someone will just take over my code and use it to build a competitor. As someone who's never published an open-source project it just kinda feels like giving away all your trade secrets.. I've been leaning towards publishing the front-end code though and if you want to include it in the Bitshares github that could be arranged. I'll probably make a decision on that before making my official delegate announcement post. I'm thinking I could offer to make it open-source after one month as a paid delegate, as that will ensure some compensation and also allow me some time to "polish" the code I'll see what I can do for the cover stats.
I would support you for a paid position assuming you commit to a certain level of effort that continually enhances bitsharesblocks and makes bitsharesblocks open source (if it isn't already). The role of bitsharesblocks will have to expand as we add support for light weight clients that need RPC query access for information.I would like to move the source for bitsharesblocks to github.com/BitShares/ One thing I really want to see for a bit asset is the cumulative total of bitassets required to cover by a certain number of days. This will let traders know how much volume of cover pressure or "future buy demand" there exists
Thanks for your hard work svk.
I've been asked before to make it open source and I've been mulling over the question. On one hand I'm attracted to the whole idea of open-source software, on the other hand I'm a little intimated by the whole thing and also skeptical/worried that someone will just take over my code and use it to build a competitor. As someone who's never published an open-source project it just kinda feels like giving away all your trade secrets..
Given the usefulness of bitsharesblocks.com I think anyone would agree you deserve high-paying delegate.Keep up the good work!
Quote from: xeroc on November 03, 2014, 02:55:20 pmalso consider adding the "website" attribute to your public data field and point to a lengthy description of goals,finance,payouts,blabla.. I believe a site is being made for "delegate profiles".
also consider adding the "website" attribute to your public data field and point to a lengthy description of goals,finance,payouts,blabla..
I'm really happy paid delegates are generating such interest! I would definitely support you.My advice: Each paid delegate should have a clear value proposition. For example: value-proposition.username (ie. marketing.methodx). You can be broad or you can be really specific (i.e. mobile-wallet.username). This is how I envision paid delegate positions playing out anyway. I'd say come up with a specific project you're going to work on and campaign on that.