BitShares Forum

Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: emski on June 13, 2014, 08:45:14 am

Title: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: emski on June 13, 2014, 08:45:14 am: Is there an issue with using the initial delegate name (the one with initial-delegate-xx) in the future and even for the real network?
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: toast on June 13, 2014, 02:59:48 pm: Quote from: emski on June 13, 2014, 08:45:14 am
Is there an issue with using the initial delegate name (the one with initial-delegate-xx) in the future and even for the real network?

We made them "nameless" specifically to get them voted out ASAP in favor of people who actually campaign.
Does that answer your question? I'm not sure what you meant.
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: emski on June 13, 2014, 03:07:35 pm: init-delegate-1 seems like a rather good name.
I was wondering If I should use it.
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: xeroc on June 13, 2014, 05:51:17 pm: Its an anonymous delegate .. no trust in who powers it ... so why keep the votes on him if there are people running delegate that you do trust
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: emski on June 13, 2014, 09:27:45 pm: Because I have its private keys.
It will no longer be anonymous - I'll be behind it. (Site and other info is WIP, I just have to pick up a name)
It was just assigned to me by luck. (or the fact that I saw the thread asking for delegates early enough... or by other unknown to me reasons)
Anyway I was just thinking about a new delegate name and one of the options was to go a bit "lazy" - sticking with "init-delegate-1".
That seems like a good idea but I need some more opinions on this.
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: bytemaster on June 13, 2014, 09:41:14 pm: Quote from: emski on June 13, 2014, 09:27:45 pm
Because I have its private keys.
It will no longer be anonymous - I'll be behind it. (Site and other info is WIP, I just have to pick up a name)
It was just assigned to me by luck. (or the fact that I saw the thread asking for delegates early enough... or by other unknown to me reasons)
Anyway I was just thinking about a new delegate name and one of the options was to go a bit "lazy" - sticking with "init-delegate-1".
That seems like a good idea but I need some more opinions on this.

Do what you like :) No technical reason not to keep it.
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: Troglodactyl on June 14, 2014, 06:08:37 am: Quote from: emski on June 13, 2014, 03:07:35 pm
init-delegate-1 seems like a rather good name.
I was wondering If I should use it.

init-delegate-1 is a horrible name. Vote for init-delegate-62, init-delegate-63, init-delegate-64, and init-delegate-65 instead. ;)

...Do I get the dubious honor of first DPOS delegate smear campaign, or did someone beat me to it?
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: emski on June 14, 2014, 06:21:33 am: nope, I think you are first.
I've seen people using "vote for X" but you are the first to use "vote for X instead Y, because X is horrible".
I'll try not to be that lazy and come up with better name.
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: bytemaster on June 14, 2014, 02:18:14 pm: init-delegate-1 was the first to be voted out :)
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: emski on June 14, 2014, 08:25:26 pm: Quote from: bytemaster on June 14, 2014, 02:18:14 pm
init-delegate-1 was the first to be voted out :)
votes on the test network doesnt matter anyway. Arent the initial votes predefined by you ?
Title: Re: Preserving initial delegate name
Post by: bytemaster on June 14, 2014, 11:29:22 pm: Quote from: emski on June 14, 2014, 08:25:26 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on June 14, 2014, 02:18:14 pm
init-delegate-1 was the first to be voted out :)
votes on the test network doesnt matter anyway. Arent the initial votes predefined by you ?

They are defined by who ever launches the DAC.