vote decay          YES
collateral            Not really
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            Never in this form

Way of implementation    Never

possible to vote to tell the community your opinion?

You talk about CN-Vote controll committee.The funny thing is what i saw is that Abit controlled committee and everyone else complaining including cn-vote that he executes only his own and your personal views and doesn't consider the opinions of any other committee member.He only stopps when being forced when not getting enough votes to pass transfers for exmample.

what binggo said is right, you do not understand the things among cn-vote, abit and committee.

and clearly, if you dislike one, he will be the worst people in the world in your words.

enjoy.

I believe fork is not the best solution for the current opinion conflict, although the expectation to fork lead BTS price to go up in short period, in long term view the fork will make the community break up and hurt the BTS brand. so I created below poll worker proposals to collect opinions from the community. I hope it can be the new start point for the community to look for consensus. please vote for each of the 4 unplanned changes to the voting system according to your opinion. I do not defined any subsequent actions that follow the poll result, however I believe the result will be important reference for any players in this game.

please check https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32546.0 for detail of the 4 unplanned changed features:

1.14.274   Poll-Unplanned Change-Support Vote Decay
1.14.275   Poll-Unplanned Change-Do Not Support Vote Decay


1.14.276   Poll-Unplanned Change-Support DPoS1
1.14.277   Poll-Unplanned Change-Do Not Support DPoS1

   
1.14.278   Poll-Unplanned Change-Support Staking Voting Power
1.14.279   Poll-Unplanned Change-Do Not Support Staking Voting Power


1.14.280   Poll-Unplanned Change-Support the Additional Voting Rules
1.14.281   Poll-Unplanned Change-No Support the Additional Voting Rules

Here the "Additional Voting Rules" stand for this:
4.voting rules after the permanent locked up appears
when the first "permanent locked up" position appear on the chain, below rules will be alive:
4.1 the voting power of the account with no "permanent locked up" position will be 0
4.2 BTS in collateral or ordering status will have no voting power

Now we have Plan A and Plan B:
Plan A: fork smoothly.
Plan B: fork with exception handling, which is discussed here: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2239

I'd like to suggest a Plan C: release a 4.* version with removed/kept/updated the features which abit had added, based on the voting result and additional discussion and voting.   and surely follow the BSIP approval->development and release->code audit and test->protocol improvement process.

In my view, either the fork happen or not, the current chain always need such a Plan C.

I hope all stake holders can positively vote to tell your opinion.

gdex-witness 也将部署一个打补丁的见证人，以协助平滑分叉。

gdex-witness will also run a witness with patch installed, to help the fork happen smoothly.

Quote

what happened has also proven, the voting power from collateral is always biased on bitAssets relevant voting, they always focus on maximizing the benefits of the debt positions owners, it's always impossible to let them to do a little compromise for the optimization of the whole system, it's not bad to cancel these voting power.

You are a hyprocate.

The threshold for price feed was Abit's idea which was supported by you and Jademont.
CN-Votes disagrees with many of your ideas which does the majority/nearly all of foreigners too.


It's basicly you trying everytime to enforce your point of view with the help of Abit where voters opinion are not being considerated at all.
Great example the MM contests

hehe, interesting, now I don't care whether cn-vote agree or disagree with my ideas, I just care whether this patch will lead BTS to a better future.

由于在4.0升级之后理事会就挖矿规则未能达成一致，导致7.29-8.6日的奖励提案至今未能批准执行。故挖矿自即日起暂停，是否重启以及何时重启另行通知。