super  great  to be able to use our registered names instead  of long-ass numbers  to send BTSX.

After doing much thinking and learning from experience with recent dry runs I have concluded that we need to have negative votes. 

A negative vote is morally equivalent to a vote of approval for "everyone but X" like a positive vote is the moral equivalent as a vote of disapproval for everyone but Y. 

In a world where the squeaky wheal gets the grease, it is far more likely that the average user will know more about who they are against than who they are for.  When there is a bad actor it is far more difficult to get people to up-vote 101 other candidates than down vote the guy causing the problem.  For automated voting it is also far easier to down vote delegates that are not producing blocks than to decide who to up vote.

The average user is lazy and unlikely to evaluate 101 different individuals.  We must factor in this laziness in our designs.

Lastly in a world with 1000 candidates, it takes a lot of work to concentrate the approval consensus.   Suppose Bad Actor has 25% approval, everyone else has to find someone they can agree to give 26% approval to bump the Bad Actor.... there are 2 solid candidates and they each split the vote 13% / 13% and thus neither is able to bump the Bad Actor.    Everyone can agree the Bad Actor should go, so they simply vote against him.   

Negative voting is effectively an easy way to compress a "vote for all, but 1" which in a way helps simulate the ability to approve more than 101 delegates.

 

This is a good idea.  I will volunteer but I am just learning myself, by the generosity of others here but if I can help I will.

Notes I have so far:

Build Instructions for Live Network on Ubuntu Server 14.04

sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install cmake git libreadline-dev uuid-dev g++ libdb++-dev libdb-dev zip libssl-dev openssl build-essential python-dev autotools-dev libicu-dev libbz2-dev libboost-dev libboost-all-dev

git clone https://github.com/dacsunlimited/bitsharesx.git
cd bitsharesx
git  checkout 0.2.1
git submodule init
Git submodule update
cmake .
make

The instructions above REPLACE the "Download and Build The Client" instructions in the document linked below.  Otherwise, the instructions in the link below are what worked for me and you should continue with them....

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/DPOS-initial-delegate-setup

EXCEPT that I didn't have any keys to import so I had to create an account and register a delegate like it is explained here:

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/DPOS-Registering-Names-And-Delegates

and by the way you will need some BTSX to register the account.  I had to bum some off someone on the forum since the only BTSX I have is on Bter and I can't withdraw it. 

In order for someone to send you BTSX with an unregistered account, you will need to give them the key shown when you enter the following command in the console:

wallet_list_my_accounts

There is also the suggestion to run NTP for time synchronization with the following instructions that I haven't verified:

sudo apt-get install ntp

Add some servers to the config file.  Add the following to /etc/npd.conf

server ntp.ubuntu.com
server pool.ntp.org

It would be good if someone could combine the 2 linked docs into a single comprehensive doc... that covers importing keys and/or creating and registering accounts from scatch.  if I have time I will try but I'm short on that these days. 

(Please correct any of my mistakes)

Thanks for your contribution, please keep your node stable and not change your port.

If you want to be removed from the seed nodes, please PM me.

Where is the port set?

Support our local celebrity and he might just give us some good PR over at letstalkbitcoin:


delegate.adam
delegate2.adam


These child names are being managed by http://daslab.io

Got my votes.

delegate1-galt is that you?

yes

delegate1-galt  is not registered on the network.

Does that mean  it's not  registered?  I see it  in the  directory as a delegate.  Is there a special command to "register on the network" or some config/ports that need to be open?  I'm thinking maybe some comms issue??

wallet_show_my_accounts

NAME (* delegate)                  KEY                                                             REGISTERED            FAVORITE       APPROVED       BLOCK PRODUCTION ENABLED
delegate1-galt *                   BTSX7CRAW6ajvXaAUYcbTmahTDzbXiddXzUFXhbKPwZKfz85nKRCtG          2014-07-22T03:24:10   NO             1              YES


get_info

mywallet (unlocked) >>> get_info
{
  "blockchain_head_block_num": 28881,
  "blockchain_head_block_age": "7 seconds old",
  "blockchain_head_block_timestamp": "20140722T162010",
  "blockchain_average_delegate_participation": 96.19047619047619,
  "blockchain_delegate_pay_rate": 225034,
  "blockchain_blocks_left_in_round": 5,
  "blockchain_confirmation_requirement": 1,
  "blockchain_accumulated_fees": "272,201.52373 BTSX",
  "blockchain_share_supply": 199972779829550,
  "blockchain_random_seed": "24e42f65289faf1f0764b99fbf6325955adf3a9d",
  "blockchain_database_version": 115,
  "blockchain_version": 109,
  "network_num_connections": 16,
  "network_num_connections_max": 100,
  "network_protocol_version": 104,
  "ntp_time": "20140722T162017",
  "ntp_error": 0.00071100000000000004,
  "wallet_open": true,
  "wallet_unlocked": true,
  "wallet_unlocked_until": "44 years  in the future",
  "wallet_unlocked_until_timestamp": "19230220T101923",
  "wallet_block_production_enabled": true,
  "wallet_next_block_production_time": null,
  "wallet_next_block_production_timestamp": null,
  "wallet_version": 100
}

Quote from: GregGozzo on July 22, 2014, 02:57:49 pm

Quote from: emski on July 22, 2014, 12:54:47 pm

Quote from: bytemaster on July 21, 2014, 10:07:53 pm

Quote from: GregGozzo on July 21, 2014, 10:01:03 pm

That isn't including any of the initial delegates. And there are still 26 of those. So 6 entities control well over half the delegates.

Maybe you guys want it that way?

This is not looking very decentralized.  Especially to any newcomers.

We want 100 unique individuals, but obviously there are not 100 qualified candidates right now.  Show me a list with 101 unique individuals ready to operate nodes and I will vote for them all in a minute.

Right now the system is young and is already more decentralized that bitcoin & Ripple.

You are entirely too quick to judge.  Look at the DIRECTION it is moving and not where it is.  It started out 100% centralized... now you are complaining about 5 people with about 7% control each?   And then insinuate that we want centralization? 

I have no delegates in top101. I'm ready to operate a node.
You may try voting in some of the delegate(s) hosted by me:

emski
angel-delegate
lotto-delegate
immortal

They have dedicated hardware. Backup internet connection. UPS. SSD.
They proved reliable during dry runs.

I have one delegate and I can't get into the top 101 either.  Paying good money for it. Probably cancel it later today.

It seems to be ironic that there is a need for unique qualified delegates but there is no way verify the uniqueness or qualifications of any delegate. So I sense a hesitancy to vote for people that aren't already "in".

Greg what was your delegate ID?  I'll vote for you.

How about giving delegate1-galt   a chance to work  for you?  I just was trying to verify it was working before asking.  if he's not good, fire him and I will fix him or build a better delegate!!