How about:

Consensus achieved through Participant Approved Witnesses (CatPAW)?

Proof of Witness Consensus


Proof of Consensus is my favorite, we have two ways to prove consensus:

Indirectly via Witness Votes
Directly via TaPoS. 

Assuming you start out with a known checkpoint (aka genesis) with a sufficiently distributed (and anonymous) ownership then this is very effective and robust.

"Witness Certified"

Quote from: iHashFury on February 05, 2016, 04:18:15 PM
Distributed Shared Consensus

or

Decentralized Shared Consensus

I like these options.

Distributed Shared Consensus

or

Decentralized Shared Consensus

A decentralised democratic digital infrastucture

Quote from: monsterer on February 04, 2016, 10:01:42 PM
You need to have a white paper discussing the byzantine tolerance, the possible attack vectors, the mitigation, the game theory etc etc - then you will at least have something to direct people towards.

+5%

Quote from: CLains on February 05, 2016, 12:10:28 PM
The whole movement of the Left capitalist critiquing clique, when they finally realize that blockchain based value transfers is the future, will decidedly favor green ecological POS with governance structures over machine-like, energy intensive POW. The fact that everyone is moving to POS, masternodes etc. puts us ahead of the curve, and the fact that ETH are moving to POS should completely vindicate our pioneering role.

I am not sure who you have been talking to recently, but for my part I see the mood having shifted gradually in our favor all through 2015. I don't think any longer the POS/POW debate is our weak spot. We're rather back to the fact that BitShares is confusing to people, that we have fewer developers joining in, and that people are unsure about the market mechanics and how all that will work.

The primary challenge as I see it is to convince the left that this apparently cynical, capitalist cryptocurrency/cryptoshares new internet value transfer economy really is the best chance we have to restructure the existing financial system in a way that provides transparency for big actors, anonymity for small actors, lower barriers of entry for value creation in the third world, and giving the means and power back to the people to self-organize in meaningful ways without centralized structures of authority.

^ This... When you talk to people who are not in crypto about the power consumption of the bitcoin network they are taken aback.

When you listen to people in crypto talk about bitcoin they talk about it in in terms of 'computing security' as a means to enforcing a barrier to entry story. i.e 'No point trying to duplicate this because its so massive.. just use bitcoin'.

I think if you want to tweak what we are now in 2.0 a bit I don't think that is much of a departure. Fact is... we no longer have the Delegates in DPOS.

Could maybe call it WPOS (Witness Proof of Stake)

You guys know that we are listed as POS in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake

Maybe after we make WPOS I can create a wiki page for it.

I also like the whitepaper thing.. though I know its difficult to justify that time.

The whole movement of the Left capitalist critiquing clique, when they finally realize that blockchain based value transfers is the future, will decidedly favor green ecological POS with governance structures over machine-like, energy intensive POW. The fact that everyone is moving to POS, masternodes etc. puts us ahead of the curve, and the fact that ETH are moving to POS should completely vindicate our pioneering role.

I am not sure who you have been talking to recently, but for my part I see the mood having shifted gradually in our favor all through 2015. I don't think any longer the POS/POW debate is our weak spot. We're rather back to the fact that BitShares is confusing to people, that we have fewer developers joining in, and that people are unsure about the market mechanics and how all that will work.

The primary challenge as I see it is to convince the left that this apparently cynical, capitalist cryptocurrency/cryptoshares new internet value transfer economy really is the best chance we have to restructure the existing financial system in a way that provides transparency for big actors, anonymity for small actors, lower barriers of entry for value creation in the third world, and giving the means and power back to the people to self-organize in meaningful ways without centralized structures of authority.

Quote from: Ben Mason on February 05, 2016, 09:59:53 AM
DPOS is an innovation to be proud of.....it is fundamental to the existence of the BitShares network and Graphene technology.  I welcome as much integration and co-operation with other blockchain projects as possible, but it's everyone else that matters more in terms of adoption.

I completely support Monsterer's suggestion for a white paper.

I don't think we should re-brand BitShares without a serious re-examination and optimization of all the marketing material/information (including the website) has been completed.  We need a comprehensive plan for targeting our chosen market/s and to adjust the material towards that goal.  Only then will we really know if there is a problem with the name of the network/community/platform.

+5% Bitshares does not have a "bad" name, everyone knows that is there and loves it (whomever I talked to in crypto world). The issue has been the marketing, and I guess the merger. There was nothing wrong with the merger itself, but it kind of invalidated (discourage) the option building more chains using bitshares / graphene. But god knows what is happening in the background, maybe plasma etc plus insurance will be a winner. ;)

PS DPoS is great.

Quote from: monsterer on February 04, 2016, 10:01:42 PM
You need to have a white paper discussing the byzantine tolerance, the possible attack vectors, the mitigation, the game theory etc etc - then you will at least have something to direct people towards.

THIS

I do not feel confident in my ability to pen such a whitepaper. Here are a pair of relevant examples for a community member to use as a template:

Tendermint [1]
Interactive Proof of Stake [2]

[1] http://tendermint.com/docs/tendermint.pdf
[2] http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.00275

DPOS is an innovation to be proud of.....it is fundamental to the existence of the BitShares network and Graphene technology.  I welcome as much integration and co-operation with other blockchain projects as possible, but it's everyone else that matters more in terms of adoption.

I completely support Monsterer's suggestion for a white paper.

I don't think we should re-brand BitShares without a serious re-examination and optimization of all the marketing material/information (including the website) has been completed.  We need a comprehensive plan for targeting our chosen market/s and to adjust the material towards that goal.  Only then will we really know if there is a problem with the name of the network/community/platform.

But Bitshares needs to continue alive same as the other chains, as it will continue to push the world boundaries.

DPoS or any label is not important, it is important how the consensus is achieved together with performance and speed. In perspective, why my business will use a blockchain? What are the options out there? Bitcoin, Ethereum, Graphene, OpenChain, Multichain, Eris. Public / Private, etc. What are the differences on trust?

On the bitshares perspective, yes the market is not in the Crypto, it is digital assets as in Blythe Masters. But that is what Identabit should be (IMHO).

Quote from: jakub on February 04, 2016, 09:59:10 PM
If we can afford changing names, I think the name "BitShares" is our biggest marketing liability.
Never too late to fix it...

Yep. Agreed.
Darkcoin / Dash pulled it off quite well.