Author Topic: BAD DELEGATES VOTED IN OVERNIGHT?!?!  (Read 22262 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
Why are you running 6 delegates. A lot of voters would be turned off by such large number of delegates run by the same person from the same location.

Low market cap, low transactions, low liquidity, and low user adoption are even bigger turn offs I think.

Our Delegate bid hits on raising all that among other things. You are welcome to explore the why at http://vote.bunkermining.com that is stated at the very beginning.

The need for 6 is was only driven by community support and the ow market cap reality of bitshares for what is required of this operation.

Voting for our delegates means a vote for higher market cap and raising BitShares standing in the crypto space overall.

I also think having delegates elected that don't even have servers operational is far worse, which was what this thread is about.

If the idea that someone operating 6 delegates who is building up bitshares and maintaining responsible delegate infrastructure for the network in contrast to that is somehow a turn-off in contrast to having delegates in the 101 that dont' even exist, then I can't argue that.

Keep in mind we already have someone (btsnow) with 4 delegates for a long time now, and Bitshares has survived.

Moonstone has had designs to get 5 Delegates elected as part of their crowdfund.

Our bid is quite different though.. everything we do flows back to BitShares and creates a buy/sell market pressure that is consistent day to day. We need to expand.. now.

Not sure how having Bitshares eco-system buying PoW waste is beneficial to Bitshares, I thought the whole idea of PoS is to avoid such waste. The entire idea of "minebitshares.com" is ridiculous to me.

Six 100% delegate controlled by one person from one location, if elected, would be an example of failure of DPoS. In this case, yes two non-operational delegates would be preferable to six 100% delegates controlled by the same person. Especially this person is spending the money on buying PoW waste.

Miners are one of the few target markets with enough crypto knowledge to be able to grasp & use  BitShares & BitAssets at this stage and I believe minebitshares has already shown more success in attracting new users than other marketing efforts to date. There is also the possibility of miners being able to mine physical gold using the services of cryptosmith at some stage which could be very popular. So it has some promise.

But yes anything more than 2 delegates would be crazy and I would be shocked if those 6 delegates got voted in. I predict if they did that there would be a huge PR backlash resulting in them being removed in less than a week. Either way it's really the last thing we need during this great uptrend leading up to the early June announcements.

I still haven't got my head around the BitAsset premium thing as I haven't looked into it that much, but I would rather subsidize that in early stages to attract users to BitAssets than minebitshares if that's the case.
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
We have referred more users to bitshares than anyone else.

Users we have referred are driving volume here daily.

We are driving transactions.. not just for bitshares but for other projects too like metaexchange.

Note that our operation in forums is located under the 'marketing' section.

I can't spell out and connect all the dots for what this project means to BitShares and DPOS/POWs overall for reasons that others who support this understand. But myself and others that support this can assure you, there is nothing wasteful about this.. just what I have evidenced already above shows the potential buy/sell created by this operation.

Have a private chat with fuzz if you like to learn more about the bigger picture of what we are doing. I think you will like it given what you have already said.

Out of curiosity though.. exactly what will 6 delegates controlled by one entity/company do to Bitshares? Please elaborate how this will cause the network, system, and or DPOS to fail.

If there was any reason I thought it would bring harm I wouldn't do it. You seem to think it will.. so help me out.

ok I can see how your operational can potentially bring in and convert users, so I guess there's merit in doing that, I'll retract my "waste" statement.

My other concern is six delegate controlled by same person equals centralization. It's a small amount of centralization, but still is centralization nonetheless. Which would give opponents Bitshares/DPoS another excuse to attack it with.

Also what exactly are you going to spending the funds from six 100% delegate income on? from what I read, basically you are handing out free money to PoW miners, hoping they would use Bitshares?
« Last Edit: May 28, 2015, 05:22:19 pm by kokojie »

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Why are you running 6 delegates. A lot of voters would be turned off by such large number of delegates run by the same person from the same location.

Low market cap, low transactions, low liquidity, and low user adoption are even bigger turn offs I think.

Our Delegate bid hits on raising all that among other things. You are welcome to explore the why at http://vote.bunkermining.com that is stated at the very beginning.

The need for 6 is was only driven by community support and the ow market cap reality of bitshares for what is required of this operation.

Voting for our delegates means a vote for higher market cap and raising BitShares standing in the crypto space overall.

I also think having delegates elected that don't even have servers operational is far worse, which was what this thread is about.

If the idea that someone operating 6 delegates who is building up bitshares and maintaining responsible delegate infrastructure for the network in contrast to that is somehow a turn-off in contrast to having delegates in the 101 that dont' even exist, then I can't argue that.

Keep in mind we already have someone (btsnow) with 4 delegates for a long time now, and Bitshares has survived.

Moonstone has had designs to get 5 Delegates elected as part of their crowdfund.

Our bid is quite different though.. everything we do flows back to BitShares and creates a buy/sell market pressure that is consistent day to day. We need to expand.. now.

Not sure how having Bitshares eco-system buying PoW waste is beneficial to Bitshares, I thought the whole idea of PoS is to avoid such waste. The entire idea of "minebitshares.com" is ridiculous to me.

Six 100% delegate controlled by one person from one location, if elected, would be an example of failure of DPoS. In this case, yes two non-operational delegates would be preferable to six 100% delegates controlled by the same person. Especially this person is spending the money on buying PoW waste.

We have referred more users to bitshares than anyone else.

Users we have referred are driving volume here daily.

We are driving transactions.. not just for bitshares but for other projects too like metaexchange.

Note that our operation in forums is located under the 'marketing' section.

I can't spell out and connect all the dots for what this project means to BitShares and DPOS/POWs overall for reasons that others who support this understand. But myself and others that support this can assure you, there is nothing wasteful about this.. just what I have evidenced already above shows the potential buy/sell created by this operation.

Have a private chat with fuzz if you like to learn more about the bigger picture of what we are doing. I think you will like it given what you have already said.

Out of curiosity though.. exactly what will 6 delegates controlled by one entity/company do to Bitshares? Please elaborate how this will cause the network, system, and or DPOS to fail.

If there was any reason I thought it would bring harm I wouldn't do it. You seem to think it will.. so help me out.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
Why are you running 6 delegates. A lot of voters would be turned off by such large number of delegates run by the same person from the same location.

Low market cap, low transactions, low liquidity, and low user adoption are even bigger turn offs I think.

Our Delegate bid hits on raising all that among other things. You are welcome to explore the why at http://vote.bunkermining.com that is stated at the very beginning.

The need for 6 is was only driven by community support and the ow market cap reality of bitshares for what is required of this operation.

Voting for our delegates means a vote for higher market cap and raising BitShares standing in the crypto space overall.

I also think having delegates elected that don't even have servers operational is far worse, which was what this thread is about.

If the idea that someone operating 6 delegates who is building up bitshares and maintaining responsible delegate infrastructure for the network in contrast to that is somehow a turn-off in contrast to having delegates in the 101 that dont' even exist, then I can't argue that.

Keep in mind we already have someone (btsnow) with 4 delegates for a long time now, and Bitshares has survived.

Moonstone has had designs to get 5 Delegates elected as part of their crowdfund.

Our bid is quite different though.. everything we do flows back to BitShares and creates a buy/sell market pressure that is consistent day to day. We need to expand.. now.

Not sure how having Bitshares eco-system buying PoW waste is beneficial to Bitshares, I thought the whole idea of PoS is to avoid such waste. The entire idea of "minebitshares.com" is ridiculous to me.

Six 100% delegate controlled by one person from one location, if elected, would be an example of failure of DPoS. In this case, yes two non-operational delegates would be preferable to six 100% delegates controlled by the same person. Especially this person is spending the money on buying PoW waste.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Why are you running 6 delegates. A lot of voters would be turned off by such large number of delegates run by the same person from the same location.

Low market cap, low transactions, low liquidity, and low user adoption are even bigger turn offs I think.

Our Delegate bid hits on raising all that among other things. You are welcome to explore the why at http://vote.bunkermining.com that is stated at the very beginning.

The need for 6 is was only driven by community support and the ow market cap reality of bitshares for what is required of this operation.

Voting for our delegates means a vote for higher market cap and raising BitShares standing in the crypto space overall.

I also think having delegates elected that don't even have servers operational is far worse, which was what this thread is about.

If the idea that someone operating 6 delegates who is building up bitshares and maintaining responsible delegate infrastructure for the network in contrast to that is somehow a turn-off in contrast to having delegates in the 101 that dont' even exist, then I can't argue that.

Keep in mind we already have someone (btsnow) with 4 delegates for a long time now, and Bitshares has survived.

Moonstone has had designs to get 5 Delegates elected as part of their crowdfund.

Our bid is quite different though.. everything we do flows back to BitShares and creates a buy/sell market pressure that is consistent day to day. We need to expand.. now.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
Why are you running 6 delegates. A lot of voters would be turned off by such large number of delegates run by the same person from the same location.

Offline fuzzy

I'd like to point out that the fact that whenever things like this happen, they get corrected within 24 hours, means that voters are NOT apathetic.  We do care.

Amen Ander  +5%
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
I'd like to point out that the fact that whenever things like this happen, they get corrected within 24 hours, means that voters are NOT apathetic.  We do care.

We do care (about the size of our wallet)

and I'd like to point to the fact that we are trying to scare the shares out of people so that we can buy more at these "lowest BTS prices in history"

Stop the cockblock please! ;)

Those special offer prices aren't ever happening again. :)

But for a limited time only, you can still buy at .04 CNY!    While supplies last!
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
I'd like to point out that the fact that whenever things like this happen, they get corrected within 24 hours, means that voters are NOT apathetic.  We do care.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline rgcrypto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 557
    • View Profile
    • Cryptoctopus Blog
thanks for pointing this out

Offline fuzzy



Check this out... yesterday it took 231+ million BTS to get into the 101

Today it suddenly DROPPED by over 60 million BTS down to 181+ million

Now we have 2 delegates in the 101 that DON'T EVEN HAVE SERVERS RUNNING!!!


Lol....the irony...this is ridiculous.
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline svk

I remember something like this happened 2-3 months ago as well.  I think it was due to an exchange accidentally using an old delegate slate.
Yea it was btc38 voting with their cold storage, they subsequently withdrew all their votes except for market.cn.group101, which is why they're #1
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
I remember something like this happened 2-3 months ago as well.  I think it was due to an exchange accidentally using an old delegate slate.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline CryptoPrometheus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
@phillyguy, @favdesu, Thanks for your support!
"Power and law are not synonymous. In fact, they are often in opposition and irreconcilable."
- Cicero

Offline fav

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
Hey guys, dposhub.org will go a long way towards helping everyone keep track of delegates and their activities. Check out our progress report in the May NullStreet Journal, and our delegate thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15832.0.html

And please vote for our delegate!

Voted, thanks.

yup, me too!