Quote from: newmine on August 21, 2015, 05:54:07 AM

Quote from: Ander on August 19, 2015, 09:55:11 PM

Quote from: speedy on August 19, 2015, 09:51:09 PM
-argentina-marketing.matt608: 369M for his 100% delegate. Its hopeless, they save more in toilet paper than BitUSD.
-marketing.methodx: 355M votes - didnt he get bored and move onto his other business interests?
-market.cn.group101: 613M votes - they are "evangelizing" in China. The member that proposed that delegate has a grand total of 8 posts https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,13226.0.html He obviously got elected and pissed off.

Are we all just too apathetic to fire people?

Also, do delegates have to reapply for their 100% positions in BTS 2.0, so we can finally trim some fat?

In 2.0 no workers will be making any BTS until we elect them to do a project.  So all of these delegates people are bitching about will be making 0 again unless they get re-elected to do something (and I expect people are not going to want to vote for marketing delegates, because the expectation is marketers can make money off referrals if they do well).

We're probably going to be seeing the core dev team proposals get elected and get BTS, and probably a few other dev projects, and not much else.  I expect inflation rate to drop some.

So... You see no use for them in a few months as they continue to underproduce now, yet you let them stay on collecting +4K BTS per day diluting your share and poisoning the Bitshares image? Sound logic there buddy.  Vote them out now and show people how the democracy works. Wait, I forgot the regular BTS holder has no voting power to do shit unless he spends money buying more BTS to outweigh the counter vote the Dev group controls. Have we really come so far from bitcoin where you have to spend money on mining equipment to get any say? Look at the collusion between the large mining farms over XT.

You are hilarious with your mental gymnastics.

newmine you speak as if you had not understood  DPOS and it's improvements over other stake based protocols, but I doubt you were still here if you don't really get it.

Quote from: Ander on August 19, 2015, 09:55:11 PM

Quote from: speedy on August 19, 2015, 09:51:09 PM
-argentina-marketing.matt608: 369M for his 100% delegate. Its hopeless, they save more in toilet paper than BitUSD.
-marketing.methodx: 355M votes - didnt he get bored and move onto his other business interests?
-market.cn.group101: 613M votes - they are "evangelizing" in China. The member that proposed that delegate has a grand total of 8 posts https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,13226.0.html He obviously got elected and pissed off.

Are we all just too apathetic to fire people?

Also, do delegates have to reapply for their 100% positions in BTS 2.0, so we can finally trim some fat?

In 2.0 no workers will be making any BTS until we elect them to do a project.  So all of these delegates people are bitching about will be making 0 again unless they get re-elected to do something (and I expect people are not going to want to vote for marketing delegates, because the expectation is marketers can make money off referrals if they do well).

We're probably going to be seeing the core dev team proposals get elected and get BTS, and probably a few other dev projects, and not much else.  I expect inflation rate to drop some.

So... You see no use for them in a few months as they continue to underproduce now, yet you let them stay on collecting +4K BTS per day diluting your share and poisoning the Bitshares image? Sound logic there buddy.  Vote them out now and show people how the democracy works. Wait, I forgot the regular BTS holder has no voting power to do shit unless he spends money buying more BTS to outweigh the counter vote the Dev group controls. Have we really come so far from bitcoin where you have to spend money on mining equipment to get any say? Look at the collusion between the large mining farms over XT.

You are hilarious with your mental gymnastics.

Quote from: Riverhead on August 20, 2015, 01:02:53 PM

If a 100% delegate sold 100% of their revenue they'd make about $500/m. I suspect that's the largest reason for the lack of effort from both the delegates and the voters. Frankly there just isn't that much money on the table.

2.0 may resolve some of this but until the market cap improves I doubt we'll see much change.

Imho...it only takes one bitshares powered chain getting big and we will see many others rise.

Quote from: DataSecurityNode on August 20, 2015, 12:33:00 PM

Quote from: 38PTSWarrior on August 20, 2015, 09:43:44 AM
Thanks for talking about this topic. I also like the brownie idea.
As stand-by delegate life is hard. So many votes in unperforming delegates captured.

In the blockexplorer you have to click stand-by delegates to even see us.
Datasecuritynode not rethinking his delegate actions.
Blackwavelabs in front of me, WTF?
People saying: bts 2.0 will solve everything.
Not thinking in the now and making the life hard for busy people!
People getting 100 percent and don*t update.
Rich for nothing! PROTEST

Sorry.. perhaps it's being lost in translation. What exactly do you mean by we are not rethinking our delegate actions?

Because of the large amounts of votes you have for the delegates in stand-by. Your idea of using the money for most profitable mining is good but you also have problems getting them in. Me too, so I cannot really say anything but maybe they would get more support if you come up with a better idea. Otherwise it feels they take too much votes.

If a 100% delegate sold 100% of their revenue they'd make about $500/m. I suspect that's the largest reason for the lack of effort from both the delegates and the voters. Frankly there just isn't that much money on the table.

2.0 may resolve some of this but until the market cap improves I doubt we'll see much change.

Actually  I had forecast this bad condition several  months ago
I suggest give a term of voting approve
eg .delegate can been vote with 3 months term , after there months this vote lose efficacy.

Quote from: BTSdac on March 21, 2015, 06:04:43 PM
so  I suggest that there have a period of validity  when vote a delegate.    for example , purpose of  3% pay delegate is only maintain block chain, so  a period of validity is forever as default.  but for 100% pay rate delegate , it would been three months as default , but can change to any period votor want to

Quote from: 38PTSWarrior on August 20, 2015, 09:43:44 AM
Thanks for talking about this topic. I also like the brownie idea.
As stand-by delegate life is hard. So many votes in unperforming delegates captured.

In the blockexplorer you have to click stand-by delegates to even see us.
Datasecuritynode not rethinking his delegate actions.
Blackwavelabs in front of me, WTF?
People saying: bts 2.0 will solve everything.
Not thinking in the now and making the life hard for busy people!
People getting 100 percent and don*t update.
Rich for nothing! PROTEST

Sorry.. perhaps it's being lost in translation. What exactly do you mean by we are not rethinking our delegate actions?

From a marketing perspective I wouldn't use brownie points to reward voters, or  to give them any other use at protocol level. They are kind of meaningless (not worthless) outside this forum, and very specific to a particular need.

From system perspective I think it would not be coherent because of it's issuance and distribution form.
Maybe another smart asset could play this role.

 +5% to DPOSHUB and wallet notifications.

I think per-job worker funding is a great way to overcome voter apathy. Periodic decision making on how to fund DAC's growth ( = own stake growth) tends to prompt awareness and commitment also on witness and delegate choosing.

Beside that, as another way to encourage regular users to become active users or even stakers (while boosting DPOS distribution/resilence),  I'd love to debate arround a -non stake size dependant- incentive to vote.

Just to try starting a brainstorm, what about something like a cyclic, fixed and delayed reward, splitted between those voters whose choosen witnesses maintained the best block production averages in the next (or N subsequent) cycles.
I think of withesses because they have protocol verifiable metrics. Might be a mess to try rewarding responsible worker and delegate votes, but same as before, a common economic incentive to vote could help to an overall commitment and also improve user/staker adoption.

It might be positive for the whole network to improve active participation from users that feel they have not enough stake to influence on decisions, or the ones who think the potencial revenue from small stakes are not worth the effort to be active on the network.

That said, I'm all for feature freeze until graphene is ready, it seems to me just a good thing to keep reserching on.

What do you think?

Quote
We are well aware that marketing delegates will become obsolete with BTS 2.0 referral system, until that we still have goals.

Please read our thread were we post our work done.

We run the biggest Bitshares meetup group and the Bitshares team always is present in the monthly Bitcoin meetups, where the Argentinian one is in the top ten worldwide. There we always do bitshares paperwallets giveaways with tri-folds and often talks about Bitshares, next one coming this Friday.

If you have any question and/or suggestion will be welcome in our thread.

Fixed link to  Bitshares Meetup group    =)

Thanks for talking about this topic. I also like the brownie idea.
As stand-by delegate life is hard. So many votes in unperforming delegates captured.

In the blockexplorer you have to click stand-by delegates to even see us.
Datasecuritynode not rethinking his delegate actions.
Blackwavelabs in front of me, WTF?
People saying: bts 2.0 will solve everything.
Not thinking in the now and making the life hard for busy people!
People getting 100 percent and don*t update.
Rich for nothing! PROTEST

Quote from: fuzzy on August 20, 2015, 05:34:43 AM

Quote from: DataSecurityNode on August 20, 2015, 05:15:28 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 02:38:06 AM

Quote from: DMo09 on August 20, 2015, 01:43:15 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 12:51:51 AM
Only referring to the delegate voting system in general:

Have we ever considered the pros and cons of vote expiration dates, say 365 days or so? Or maybe losing a percentage of that person's vote over time unless continuously reaffirmed?

Like voting a delegate into a term in office?

That might keep people more active...

Not really. More as a tool/method to avoid stale delegates remaining active after their active support has faded.

I can imagine the wallet getting updates when the initial vote time expires, reminding the wallet owner to reallocate their votes.

Launching DPOSHUB we have plans to hold a monthly 'go vote' event that we hope will keep delegates in line and also keep the community updating their votes.

I like the idea of a wallet reminder... I think it would be a nice feature for the host to simply have a popup once every month or so to just give an alert or something about refreshing votes.

I love it.  Maybe people should automatically have one time a month when voting gives them brownie points.  Voting is good for the ecosystem and even if someone goes in and votes for the same people again, it gets people in the habit of easily interfacing with it. 
I can't see how this wouldn't get Bytemaster's appreciation. :)

+5% for the brownie point idea.

Quote from: DataSecurityNode on August 20, 2015, 05:15:28 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 02:38:06 AM

Quote from: DMo09 on August 20, 2015, 01:43:15 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 12:51:51 AM
Only referring to the delegate voting system in general:

Have we ever considered the pros and cons of vote expiration dates, say 365 days or so? Or maybe losing a percentage of that person's vote over time unless continuously reaffirmed?

Like voting a delegate into a term in office?

That might keep people more active...

Not really. More as a tool/method to avoid stale delegates remaining active after their active support has faded.

I can imagine the wallet getting updates when the initial vote time expires, reminding the wallet owner to reallocate their votes.

Launching DPOSHUB we have plans to hold a monthly 'go vote' event that we hope will keep delegates in line and also keep the community updating their votes.

I like the idea of a wallet reminder... I think it would be a nice feature for the host to simply have a popup once every month or so to just give an alert or something about refreshing votes.

I love it.  Maybe people should automatically have one time a month when voting gives them brownie points.  Voting is good for the ecosystem and even if someone goes in and votes for the same people again, it gets people in the habit of easily interfacing with it. 
I can't see how this wouldn't get Bytemaster's appreciation. :)

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 02:38:06 AM

Quote from: DMo09 on August 20, 2015, 01:43:15 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 12:51:51 AM
Only referring to the delegate voting system in general:

Have we ever considered the pros and cons of vote expiration dates, say 365 days or so? Or maybe losing a percentage of that person's vote over time unless continuously reaffirmed?

Like voting a delegate into a term in office?

That might keep people more active...

Not really. More as a tool/method to avoid stale delegates remaining active after their active support has faded.

I can imagine the wallet getting updates when the initial vote time expires, reminding the wallet owner to reallocate their votes.

Launching DPOSHUB we have plans to hold a monthly 'go vote' event that we hope will keep delegates in line and also keep the community updating their votes.

I like the idea of a wallet reminder... I think it would be a nice feature for the host to simply have a popup once every month or so to just give an alert or something about refreshing votes.

Quote from: DMo09 on August 20, 2015, 01:43:15 AM

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 20, 2015, 12:51:51 AM
Only referring to the delegate voting system in general:

Have we ever considered the pros and cons of vote expiration dates, say 365 days or so? Or maybe losing a percentage of that person's vote over time unless continuously reaffirmed?

Like voting a delegate into a term in office?

That might keep people more active...

Not really. More as a tool/method to avoid stale delegates remaining active after their active support has faded.

I can imagine the wallet getting updates when the initial vote time expires, reminding the wallet owner to reallocate their votes.