181
General Discussion / Re: Now that Daniel Larimer (aka bytemaster) is gone...
« on: June 05, 2016, 01:50:49 am »
Soooooooo how about that Bitshares thing huh?
WHAT do YOU want?
WHAT do YOU want?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
How about a community poll on rebranding to DEX? Its such a great name Im surprised there isnt a crypto out there already using it.
I agree, it's quite strange that the name DEX is still unclaimed.
I've planned to add a poll after some initial feedback is gathered, just to avoid knee-jerk reactions.
It's a tough and costly decision, but I think the opportunity is ideal and the name is just perfect for us.
Regarding the costs of rebranding (e.g. compensating people for domain names already bought) I think it should be covered by all of us, i.e. by a worker proposal.
It's an investment that has some risk associated with it but the benefits could be enormous.
Look what's happened to Crypti and Darkcoin. They took the risk and it payed off.
It seems Nxt is going to make a similar move pretty soon.
It's risky as it can further deepen the split in this community and become a distraction but on the other hand if we manage to pull it off efficiency it can become a truly fresh start and something that heals the wounds. At the same time we could also eliminate our dependence on Bitsapphire hosting this forum and finally move to some other, more modern forum platform.
We've been dumped after a long and difficult relationship. Now we need a tangible change that brings new energy and motivation.
Is the 5% sharedrop on BTS holders going to occur after the ICO has complete?
And we seem to have given up on the better way to get interest, which was p2p lending/bond market.Given up? Not me. Still in talks with people that can help fund or even develop it. In fact, there are than one party interested in doing this ..
but as you know ... developing for graphene isnt as easy as putting together javascript snippets
Glad to hear it, but BM hasnt talked about this for ages and hes the only one capable of developing it.
I disagree .. mostly because the issue with workers is that they pay out in a volatile currency. If they paid out in USD, things would look different from the worker perspective. The DAO figured thia out by now aswell
How could the System be changed that workers are paid in USD?
An extra automated step in paying out.
We definitely should look into that. That could help us a lot.
Makes sense. I wonder what the implications are though.. or whether this would be trivial to add.
"Losers average Losers"- Paul Tudor Jones (basically means loser investors average down on their bad investments...which most people here are). Go ahead, keep bringing down your "cost average" and getting excited over every pump to lower highs... millions of bankrupt investors have done the same thing.
Yeah basically this. Once I stopped trying to buy bitshares I started doing much better in crypto. Lisk has made back a bunch of my BTS losses. Maybe it will make them all back.
The average worker summary might be something like:
I was working one day, starting to make progress on worker proposal X, but then I got fired the next day so I shifted my priorities and started working on something else, trying to earn a living you know?
Then a week later I got voted back in, so I thought, ok, well I'll give it another try and start working on this project again.
After two weeks passed I was really starting to make progress, but I was once again voted out, so I went back to looking for real work where I'm not hired and fired seemingly at random.
Then one day I noticed my worker was voted back in, but by then I was so tired of the uncertainty that I had just moved on to something else less stressful and uncertain.
Is this not a problem which needs to be addressed? What developer wants to work in such conditions?
Would it not make more sense to be hired for a fixed term determined by the project scope?
2bts
I've sort of had a similar thought in regards to worker proposals. There needs to be a consistency.
Voters have to be voting to a certain degree of commitment the same as the commitment being given by the worker.
That said, there has to be greater consistent reporting by the worker as well.
I would like to see some kind of function in workers that had a reporting period required. Basically just a cmd that had to be executed with only a URL supplied to give a report on work and progress. If this isn't executed then within 48 hours the worker expiration is executes early and his worker ends. At that point he has to open a new worker and convince the shareholders to restart.
Generally if you don't show up to work for 2 days without any explanation or attempt to communicate, you would be replaced. In this instance I think a weekly, biweekly reporting period would be ideal and keep shareholders in the loop to know that progress is being made... if there is the commitment from the blockchain, then this level of reporting to maintain isn't unreasonable to be expected from the worker.
This however would require some additional work that would require a hardfork. I don't think we should hold back on making improvements to the worker proposal space in Bitshares.. it clearly can use improvements. If our tool for improvements to BTS is working well, it will help along all other improvements more efficiently.
Just my 2bts.
Yeah, I think having mutually reinforcing expectations of both shareholder / protocol, and worker would be really good.
As I attempted to illustrate above it's currently a pretty wishy-washy scenario. I really like the suggestion of baking a solution right into the protocol.
I would support some kind of weekly reporting criteria. I like the command idea, but in order to keep this from being gamed for the duration of the work period, perhaps this is an area for some limited oversight, override capacity from the committee.