BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: Agent86 on June 26, 2015, 04:05:16 pm
-
I think share polling is super important for a consensus system but unfortunately despite talk of its importance I don't feel like smartly implemented stake polling / governance features have been a sufficient priority. This gives the impression that BTS is very centralized and prevents large changes from having a feeling of legitimacy. Things like current delegates and even workers in BTS2.0 leave a lot to be desired in terms of use for polling and governance IMO.
The best thing I can think of for stakeholders to start voting on things now in a user friendly way would be to register 0% delegates.
We also need delegates to be able to "resign" so that voting in a delegate to express an opinion on a poll doesn't actually elect a block producer. IMO it's best if a resign feature allows people to still vote for and view resigned delegates in gui, they just aren't part of the top 101 that produce blocks; that way they can be used for polls. The resign feature should probably be ironed out regardless so delegates who have stopped producing blocks can resign. I'm offering a $500 bitUSD bounty to get the resign feature for delegates fixed/complete asap (not waiting for BTS2).
I've registered two 0% delegates to start a poll:
upgrade-to-bts-2 (vote if you support the upgrade) (ID: 89386)
do-not-upgrade-to-bts-2 (vote for this if you don't support the upgrade) (ID: 89387)
I think it's obvious which way this poll will go but I still think it's important for stakeholders to show it if they are willing to take the time express themselves. You can burn comments on the wall of poll delegates if you like too. My feeling is that the success of BTS depends heavily on stakeholder voting, and if we are ever able to get over 50% of active stake agreement on some things that would be very helpful. PLEASE VOTE! And if there are other polls people want to make then do the same thing and promote your poll. If either are voted into top 101 I will get a delegate running and produce blocks or retire/resign the account(s).
-
This feature (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/design-issues#voting) would help with that a lot in BitShares 2.0. If that isn't supported (and I don't know why it shouldn't be since it is a relatively simple tweak), it can be approximated (at least for voting with BTS stake) using a zero pay worker proposal.
As for voting in the current BitShares 0.x system on the upgrade to 2.0, wouldn't it be easier to just have all the current delegates (and delegate candidates) publicly announce their position (for upgrade or against upgrade) and let the stakeholders vote them in and out appropriately over the next month? That way if the stakeholders are against the upgrade (which I don't think anyone believes is true), BitShares 0.x will have the right block producers in place to avoid the node upgrade that would cease block production by a certain date. I'm a fan of letting the elected representatives just do the right thing but allow the stakeholders who actually care to veto their decisions (and quickly vote them out) if they disagree. For example, I think the 2 week delay on delegate actions in BitShares 2.0 strikes a great balance between progress and stakeholder control when considering the reality of voter apathy.
Edit: Then again, this is a huge change. And in BitShares 2.0 any hard forking change should require active stakeholder approval. So I guess what you are proposing is the same thing. Plus, it is a easy thing to do, so why not. Let's see how long it will take to get upgrade-to-bts-2 voted up.
-
It will be very nice when we have actual proposal voting implemented, so we don't have to use this hack of voting for a delegate.
But since we don't have it yet, this is a good temporary solution. Go vote for 2.0!
-
This feature (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/design-issues#voting) would help with that a lot in BitShares 2.0. If that isn't supported (and I don't know why it shouldn't be since it is a relatively simple tweak), it can be approximated (at least for voting with BTS stake) using a zero pay worker proposal.
As for voting in the current BitShares 0.x system on the upgrade to 2.0, wouldn't it be easier to just have all the current delegates (and delegate candidates) publicly announce their position (for upgrade or against upgrade) and let the stakeholders vote them in and out appropriately over the next month? That way if the stakeholders are against the upgrade (which I don't think anyone believes is true), BitShares 0.x will have the right block producers in place to avoid the node upgrade that would cease block production by a certain date. I'm a fan of letting the elected representatives just do the right thing but allow the stakeholders who actually care to veto their decisions (and quickly vote them out) if they disagree. For example, I think the 2 week delay on delegate actions in BitShares 2.0 strikes a great balance between progress and stakeholder control when considering the reality of voter apathy.
IMO telling people to go find out which delegates support this or that and then vote accordingly is a very round-about way of gauging stakeholder support for something. It's just way less straightforward and doesn't give you the same data at all.
Yea, I think that in BTS2 there may well be a reasonable way to do stake polling, even in BTS 0.x using delegates as a proxy is very close to being ok. My main issue with governance in BTS 2 is things like people have to register non-diluting workers and vote for them and the way there is a fixed pie of dilution that otherwise gets divvied up. If stakeholders were able to prove that they could reach 50% consensus of active stake on certain things they could "change the rules" without it being an arbitrary declaration by Dan or other authority. For example, the 50BTS dilution rate that halves every 4 years; maybe there would come a time when that isn't desired... changing it is changing the rules of the game and doesn't seem right, but if there is provable overwhelming stakeholder support than I think it is a totally different thing. I think it is really useful for stakeholders to get in the habit of expressing a stake weighted opinion on things so why not start now?
-
I think this is a great initiative -- I agree stake-weighted polling is a critical tool for enabling the stakeholders to collectively make decisions about our community.
Those who are able, please post translated versions of this post in the relevant language subforums.
I encourage everyone to vote! :)
-
I encourage everyone to vote! :)
+5%
-
My feeling is that the success of BTS depends heavily on stakeholder voting, and if we are ever able to get over 50% of active stake agreement on some things that would be very helpful.
+5% Absolutely. Shareholder voting is one of our killer features" that hasn't been leveraged to its potential.
-
could it be possible to have that on the forum itself with a bitshares plugin?
-
could it be possible to have that on the forum itself with a bitshares plugin?
I think something like this would belong closer to the wallet.
-
Thanks Method-X, CLains, vikram, Ander, arhag, and all for the support of the poll and taking the time to participate/vote and show support for the upgrade!
-
+5% Fantastic agent86, this should have been done long ago. This is a true test of the concept of the DPoS system. If we can't motivate and mobilize the community on this why should anyone expect DPoS (or voting in general) as a consensus mechanism will work?
Perhaps it is a "hack", but what's wrong with a little improvisation? McGuyver would be proud if he were a coder. This is no less a hack than BitAssets 1.0 was or client 0.4.2.7 was compared with 0.9.2 - it's just progress.
It's effective and it's functional, plus it provides useful feedback about the concept of stakeholder governance. If this community is an aggregate representation of society at large the results won't be good. Will apathy and passivism be dominant or will we show the world that individuals AND our community has the drive, motivation and will to take responsibility for ourselves and set the course of our future?
What should the time frame of this poll / vote be? How much time is reasonable to get the word out? I favor 2 weeks myself, what does everyone else think?
Too bad this wasn't posted before today's mumble!
-
In order to get greater shareholder engagement, I think we need to find a way to communicate these issues directly through the wallet. How many people will not vote, because they will never read about these delegates. Mobile wallets with notifications of decisions needing votes would be useful as well. I am sure there are many supporters that do not keep a wallet synced at all times.
-
In order to get greater shareholder engagement, I think we need to find a way to communicate these issues directly through the wallet. How many people will not vote, because they will never read about these delegates. Mobile wallets with notifications of decisions needing votes would be useful as well. I am sure there are many supporters that do not keep a wallet synced at all times.
Stay tuned.. delegate.dposhub-org is coming out soon with a solution to this. We have been working on it for some time now, and will have a closed beta release soon.
-
voted +5% Great initiative
-
In order to get greater shareholder engagement, I think we need to find a way to communicate these issues directly through the wallet. How many people will not vote, because they will never read about these delegates. Mobile wallets with notifications of decisions needing votes would be useful as well. I am sure there are many supporters that do not keep a wallet synced at all times.
Stay tuned.. delegate.dposhub-org is coming out soon with a solution to this. We have been working on it for some time now, and will have a closed beta release soon.
One of the most important projects IMO
My feeling is that the success of BTS depends heavily on stakeholder voting, and if we are ever able to get over 50% of active stake agreement on some things that would be very helpful.
+5% Absolutely. Shareholder voting is one of our killer features" that hasn't been leveraged to its potential.
-
In order to get greater shareholder engagement, I think we need to find a way to communicate these issues directly through the wallet. How many people will not vote, because they will never read about these delegates. Mobile wallets with notifications of decisions needing votes would be useful as well. I am sure there are many supporters that do not keep a wallet synced at all times.
Stay tuned.. delegate.dposhub-org is coming out soon with a solution to this. We have been working on it for some time now, and will have a closed beta release soon.
+5%
-
+5% Great initiative, and looking good:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=upgrade-to-bts-2
http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=do-not-upgrade-to-bts-2
-
Voted.
-
+5% Great initiative, and looking good:
http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=upgrade-to-bts-2
http://bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=do-not-upgrade-to-bts-2
voted...can we make a tread out of this poll?
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/niejw.jpg) (https://imgflip.com/i/niejw)
-
bump - come on - pls give your vote ...
UPGRADE TO 2.0
http://www.bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/votes?name=upgrade-to-bts-2
or
NO UPGRADE TO 2.0
http://www.bitsharesblocks.com/delegate/info?name=do-not-upgrade-to-bts-2
-
Hahaha.. 1 no vote.. I think that settles things here. :)
-
Some intermediate results as of blockheight 3117198:
upgrade-to-bts-2: 8188377644517 (approx 82M BTS)
do-not-upgrade-to-bts-2: 0
lol .. take a look yourself!
-
will vote function enhanced in bts2.0？ follow my vote team