Quote from: krabbypatty on July 22, 2014, 11:57:57 am

It would be nice if setting production off, releases your slot temporarily to others who are eager to produce blocks.

thats a very good idea!!!
It should help for maintenance periods,  or to deactivate them due knowing problems and give the opportunity to stand-by delegates to participate!!!

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6013.msg80682#msg80682

I think I got a better idea here.

Ok. How about this:

Self correcting system. Based on a delegate % of missed blocks, you let in a random potential candidate for a block.

So a delegate drops down to 80% of reliability. In the future with a 20% chance you give their block to a delegate waiting in line.

That will motivate delegates to be 100% and also self correct if they are down for some reason.

He doesn't have to validate blocks he missed because he won't be included in the batch selection if he has marked himself as I'm no longer running.

In fact you kinda already have that. If I edit my account could I remove the delegate portion? If yes then you have what I'm talking about. I'm not sure if one can make themselves not a delegate and then later reregister. And if they lose the votes in the process.

Delegate pays a fee which gets destroyed to toggle online presence or in fact set any attribute on their user.

Also my proposal is for the numbers 101 and 1001 to be dynamically adjusted. You can start with 101/101 which is what you have right now

Now with the first BTSX bounty.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6017.msg80525#msg80525

In short you have not read the economics of the situation.  Your proposal costs 10x as much for the network to operate.

Because 1001 delegates need to be running in case they get selected, instead of 101? How is that different at the moment, all the pending candidates are running a node anyways.

These are assumptions, correct me if wrong. We have 101 slots reserved for elect delegates, rearranged every 101 blocks.

PROPOSAL:

Each batch of 101 blocks randomly assign 101 delegates based on certain total % (adjustable) of their total votes.

EXAMPLES:

A1-A10 have 20% of the votes (2% each)
B1-B20 have 20% of the votes (1% each)
C1-C40 have 20% of the votes (0.5% each)
D1-D100 have 20% of the votes (0.2% each)
E1-E1000 have 20% of the votes (0.02% each)

In our configuration each of the groups will technically have equal chance to get a delegate to "represent" them.

A typical example might be that each batch you could have a good distribution of delegates, should closely represent the following:

21 A (technically I only listed 10 delegates above)
20 B
20 C
20 D
20 E

This means that the delegates in the E section will have a very tiny chance of getting selected, but will have a very big chance of having a delegate picked out.

To Bytemaster, please consider this option. Otherwise whoever has the highest stake, dominates the delegate selection and nothing is stopping them from having 100% delegates even if they only have 20% of the BTSX.


---

IN SHORT:

We currently have 101 out of 101 elect delegates. Make elections every batch and pick 101 out of 1001, such that chance to get selected is proportional to vote count. Make the two numbers adjustable via proposals + shareholder voting.