Please cast your vote for where to send gentso's delegate funds

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Delegate should die then.. you provided every option in the poll except for that option. This is denying good delegates a position in the 101 who can do good for bitshares. The delegate was voted in to work, not to be burned. Maintaining the position is denying the votes that wanted a 100% delegate working for bitshares.

Majority consensus voted for the delegate to continue to provide support to bitshares in divided options. You have denied the consensus.

I will be removing all my votes and my slates from voting for this delegate today and urge you to post an update about the no longer functional delegate position you are maintaining in your delegate proposal/update thread.

I have denied nothing. The delegate is still securing the network. That has value. You do what you will Jonathon. As a "threat" that is meaningless to me. If delegate.verbaltech is voted out so be it, no regrets. But I will not hasten it along. All I will do is find a place for the 85% based on this poll.

Also, please keep in mind I could have kept my mouth shut and not done any of this, so DSN's demand that I voluntarily kill the delegate would leave a gap in security, which from the start he said was his main concern. Sounds like that may not actually be your primary concern. You're just looking for an easy opportunity to gain yet another delegate. You're not the only one trying to survive a bad economy Jonathon.

Was any due diligence done by contacting everyone in the original proposition thread to let them know of this poll?

Speaking of motives.. you have stated your's plainly above now. which is to entrench yourself in a delegate YOU were not voted for. Your inference of my motives is both wrong and insulting. Being on the wrong side of consensus though, pot shots are expected.

Given your denial of the consensus which funny enough is changing as this thread continues, the only reasonable course of action now is to vote out the delegate and give proper notice of it's removal.

As for lil_jays insights into the ineffectiveness of this entire exercise as it was executed, It would take ample amounts of time to eventually arrive at an answer, by which time a substantial amount of BTS will have been accumulated.

It would only be agreeable at this stage to me to take the delegate offline so everyone knows it is no longer functional.. allow them to seek out and find the poll process.. give them a chance to either vote in the poll or vote it out if that is what they want.. and then once the consensus is reached.. then bring the delegate back online if its still in the 101. This gives other delegates that people may want to vote for an opportunity to be voted for instead of being displaced by a lame position the way this and at least one other is.

Bottom line though is the way the system is .. the choice is yours what action to take that is in the best interest of the voters. I would submit that my proposition is.

If the burn is going to persist.. then take that 15% of what you want out.. burn the rest.. and take the delegate offline so it doesn't produce another block and let it get voted out like john-galt.

[Thom]

Right now all the people who want to distribute the funds need to pick 1 of several answers.  While people who want to burn only have to chose 1 option.  Therefore you are dividing the votes of distributers and concentrating those of burners.  In order for the distributers to win, they would all have to agree upon a certain distribution right off the bat without any debate, which is very unlikely.  Do you see what I mean now?

I see lil_jay, I get your point. However, as I said I took that into account by providing 2 open ended options at the end of the poll. It would be impossible to come up with a poll that covered ALL possibilities, so those last two options provide a way to alter this distro in whatever way the voter wants. So why has nobody made any other distribution suggestions? Even DSN's "suicide" position. I contend that is not a fair thing to ask me to do. THAT option is in the hands of ALL voters, not just the teeny tiny few participating in this poll.

The reason that no one picked "a different distribution" is because your other choices encompassed a more specific option that they desired.

The problem is you are trying to gain specific consensus through a single poll.  Often several sets of questions need to be asked to learn a specific demographics desires.  This is how survey websites work.  There is not 1 question with a large set of responses, but a series of questions and polls that build off each other.

Here is what I think would be the correct Process:

1.  Should we burn or distribute? A. Burn B. Distribute
     if A: Burn --> Survey Ended and Burn
     if B: Go to question 2
2.  Who should receive the funds? A. Voted in Delegates  B. Delegates not yet voted in C. Workers D.  A combination of A, B, & C
     if A:  Ask question about which voted in delegates
     if B:  Ask question about which stand by delegates
     if C:  Ask question about what outside workers
     if D:  Ask question about which A, B, C Workers
3.  Take answer from question 2 and give a more specific list of distribution
     Answer -->  This is how the funds should be distributed

This is the minimum amount of research that should be done for delegating how these funds should be spent.

Isn't your first statement obvious? Of course if there was a more appealing choice than "Some other distribution" they should choose that, and from what you are saying they did. Why is that unfair?

The detailed approach you provided here is very reasonable but a considerable amount of time and effort to oversee. I didn't expect this was going to be a difficult thing to figure out, but I stand corrected.

Those who agree with lil_jay and want to scrap this poll in favor of his process should voice that opinion here, along with how long they are willing to allow the process to complete and any other details they think are relevant.

[sschechter]

I think arbitrarily burning funds is stupid.  It only makes sense from a value perspective when everyone knows exactly what has been burned.  There is no depreciation if we can't track exactly whats been burned.

Burned BTS are visible in the blockchain, and the client should adjust the total share supply accordingly.

Thanks for clarifying.  If that's the case, burning can serve a purpose 

[lil_jay890]

Right now all the people who want to distribute the funds need to pick 1 of several answers.  While people who want to burn only have to chose 1 option.  Therefore you are dividing the votes of distributers and concentrating those of burners.  In order for the distributers to win, they would all have to agree upon a certain distribution right off the bat without any debate, which is very unlikely.  Do you see what I mean now?

I see lil_jay, I get your point. However, as I said I took that into account by providing 2 open ended options at the end of the poll. It would be impossible to come up with a poll that covered ALL possibilities, so those last two options provide a way to alter this distro in whatever way the voter wants. So why has nobody made any other distribution suggestions? Even DSN's "suicide" position. I contend that is not a fair thing to ask me to do. THAT option is in the hands of ALL voters, not just the teeny tiny few participating in this poll.

The reason that no one picked "a different distribution" is because your other choices encompassed a more specific option that they desired.

The problem is you are trying to gain specific consensus through a single poll.  Often several sets of questions need to be asked to learn a specific demographics desires.  This is how survey websites work.  There is not 1 question with a large set of responses, but a series of questions and polls that build off each other.

Here is what I think would be the correct Process:

1.  Should we burn or distribute? A. Burn B. Distribute
     if A: Burn --> Survey Ended and Burn
     if B: Go to question 2
2.  Who should receive the funds? A. Voted in Delegates  B. Delegates not yet voted in C. Workers D.  A combination of A, B, & C
     if A:  Ask question about which voted in delegates
     if B:  Ask question about which stand by delegates
     if C:  Ask question about what outside workers
     if D:  Ask question about which A, B, C Workers
3.  Take answer from question 2 and give a more specific list of distribution
     Answer -->  This is how the funds should be distributed

This is the minimum amount of research that should be done for delegating how these funds should be spent.

[Thom]

Right now all the people who want to distribute the funds need to pick 1 of several answers.  While people who want to burn only have to chose 1 option.  Therefore you are dividing the votes of distributers and concentrating those of burners.  In order for the distributers to win, they would all have to agree upon a certain distribution right off the bat without any debate, which is very unlikely.  Do you see what I mean now?

I see lil_jay, I get your point. However, as I said I took that into account by providing 2 open ended options at the end of the poll. It would be impossible to come up with a poll that covered ALL possibilities, so those last two options provide a way to alter this distro in whatever way the voter wants. I am also not convinced of your premise that those who want a distro but not those I suggested would instead vote for burning. They have 3 choices:

1) Vote for one of the distro option in the poll
2) Don't vote all all
3) Post a different distro perference

None of those choices are a choice to burn. Yet, the majority of those voting did not choose one of those, but instead chose to burn.

So why has nobody made any other distribution suggestions? Even DSN's "suicide" position. I contend that is not a fair thing to ask me to do. THAT option is in the hands of ALL voters, not just the teeny tiny few participating in this poll.

To DSN & pheonike:

I understand your perspecive, and think pheonike's suggestion makes sense. I do not want to buck the community. I will not burn the funds unless that is CLEARLY what the most people want to do. These numbers are changing as we discuss this, yet the largest number voted to burn. If I base NOT to burn on the aggregate of the remainder, that still doesn't answer the question of WHERE or HOW to distribute the funds, and I don't find much of this discussion helping to resolve that.

Another point that seems to have been overlooked is that I AM NOTIFYING EVERYONE of what is going on with this delegate, in the proposal thread for delegate.verbaltech AS WELL AS these 2 other threads about redirecting the funds. What other notification do you expect, a full page Wall Street Journal ad? Give me a break! I'm acting with alot more disclosure than I've seen from many other delegates.

I would much prefer to distribute. Just give me a clear message as to where, or suggest another poll. Knocking my efforts without alternative suggestions is not constructive.

If the community cannot express what they want clearly then perhaps burning is best. C'mon, post your alternative suggestions and stop complaining already!

[Thom]

Delegate should die then.. you provided every option in the poll except for that option. This is denying good delegates a position in the 101 who can do good for bitshares. The delegate was voted in to work, not to be burned. Maintaining the position is denying the votes that wanted a 100% delegate working for bitshares.

Majority consensus voted for the delegate to continue to provide support to bitshares in divided options. You have denied the consensus.

I will be removing all my votes and my slates from voting for this delegate today and urge you to post an update about the no longer functional delegate position you are maintaining in your delegate proposal/update thread.

I have denied nothing. The delegate is still securing the network. That has value. You do what you will Jonathon. As a "threat" that is meaningless to me. If delegate.verbaltech is voted out so be it, no regrets. But I will not hasten it along. All I will do is find a place for the 85% based on this poll.

Also, please keep in mind I could have kept my mouth shut and not done any of this, so DSN's demand that I voluntarily kill the delegate would leave a gap in security, which from the start he said was his main concern. Sounds like that may not actually be your primary concern. You're just looking for an easy opportunity to gain yet another delegate. You're not the only one trying to survive a bad economy Jonathon.

[lil_jay890]

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

You don't burn by sending to an address. There's a burn command in the CLI:

Code: [Select]

wallet_burn <amount_to_burn> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous]
Burns given amount to the given account.  This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.                                                 


Bummer. That means I can't simply replace gentso's address in the payroll config to burn his funds. Looks like I need to modify the payroll plugin in bts_tools in order to automate this burn process. That should be easy. Thanks PC for the info.

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

Your poll is not really fair... You have a hole bunch of options that say to distribute the funds, but only 1 option to destroy the funds.  This is forcing the voters who would like to see them used for something to spread out their votes.

The more realistic poll results would be:

16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work
14-Burn

I respectfully but emphatically disagree lil_jay.

I provided many options, including the 2 last options where you can express exactly how you want the funds redirected (specify your desires in this thread).

I don't understand your proposal. You failed to say WHICH delegate should receive the funds (16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work), and that's the primary reason for this poll.

I think your objection is a moot point anyway, as it looks like the majority of those voting want the funds burned (15 out of 32 voting as of now) rather than redirected.

If these results stand at the end of the mumble, I will change the payroll plugin to burn gentso's portion.

Thom,  A fair poll would read something like this:

[
A: Burn
B: Distribute to delegates/workers

If B garners the most votes then a separate poll will be created for distribution of funds
]

Right now all the people who want to distribute the funds need to pick 1 of several answers.  While people who want to burn only have to chose 1 option.  Therefore you are dividing the votes of distributers and concentrating those of burners.  In order for the distributers to win, they would all have to agree upon a certain distribution right off the bat without any debate, which is very unlikely.  Do you see what I mean now?

[pc]

I think arbitrarily burning funds is stupid.  It only makes sense from a value perspective when everyone knows exactly what has been burned.  There is no depreciation if we can't track exactly whats been burned.

Burned BTS are visible in the blockchain, and the client should adjust the total share supply accordingly.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

The majority of people want it to be distributed, so as long and the the total is more than burn you should consider picking the highest distribution option.

But the majority of those voting don't want it distributed. 15 votes were cast to burn, the rest of the votes are scattered among the other options.

It's not the option I prefer, but that's just me. My vote carries no more weight than any other's. In fact I wouldn't have voted at all if I could see the poll results.

17 votes for funds to be redirected to work
15 votes for burn

Consensus denied.. just going to burn anyways << message you are sending.

You must make a post to notify those that voted for you tat your delegate is no longer working for bitshares and they should remove their votes.

[Thom]

The majority of people want it to be distributed, so as long and the the total is more than burn you should consider picking the highest distribution option.

But the majority of those voting don't want it distributed. 15 votes were cast to burn, the rest of the votes are scattered among the other options.

It's not the option I prefer, but that's just me. My vote carries no more weight than any other's. In fact I wouldn't have voted at all if I could see the poll results.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

You don't burn by sending to an address. There's a burn command in the CLI:

Code: [Select]

wallet_burn <amount_to_burn> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous]
Burns given amount to the given account.  This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.                                                 


Bummer. That means I can't simply replace gentso's address in the payroll config to burn his funds. Looks like I need to modify the payroll plugin in bts_tools in order to automate this burn process. That should be easy. Thanks PC for the info.

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

Your poll is not really fair... You have a hole bunch of options that say to distribute the funds, but only 1 option to destroy the funds.  This is forcing the voters who would like to see them used for something to spread out their votes.

The more realistic poll results would be:

16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work
14-Burn

I respectfully but emphatically disagree lil_jay.

I provided many options, including the 2 last options where you can express exactly how you want the funds redirected (specify your desires in this thread).

I don't understand your proposal. You failed to say WHICH delegate should receive the funds (16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work), and that's the primary reason for this poll.

I think your objection is a moot point anyway, as it looks like the majority of those voting want the funds burned (15 out of 32 voting as of now) rather than redirected.

If these results stand at the end of the mumble, I will change the payroll plugin to burn gentso's portion.

Delegate should die then.. you provided every option in the poll except for that option. This is denying good delegates a position in the 101 who can do good for bitshares. The delegate was voted in to work, not to be burned. Maintaining the position is denying the votes that wanted a 100% delegate working for bitshares.

Majority consensus voted for the delegate to continue to provide support to bitshares in divided options. You have denied the consensus.

I will be removing all my votes and my slates from voting for this delegate today and urge you to post an update about the no longer functional delegate position you are maintaining in your delegate proposal/update thread.

[Thom]

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

If the final say is burn.. then you should be taking the delegate offline again and letting it get voted down. That is essentially what the poll is saying if you are to interpret that as such. Let the whole delegate go down just like tradebts.gulu in this case.

lil_lay890 also brought up a good point that the final 'consensus' if you want to call it that was in favor of putting the funds to work in some way. I agree with this position more so. The delegate was voted to work for bitshares, not burn... otherwise someone else is being denied the right to be voted in. Most people are not aware of what has happened to your delegate.

I don't understand, as I just posted in my reply to PC & lil_jay.

I agree with you concerning the applied to some effort vs. burn, however the poll results show the majority of those voting are NOT voting to redirect but rather to burn. This seems to conflict with what you are saying.

As I said from the start, this entire concern goes away if delegate.verbaltech gets voted out. That is not my choice to make. I wish to operate a witness when 2.0 is released, should that be an option. To that end I will not terminate the delegate myself. I am only trying to make the best of a bad situation, and be respectful of the community at the same time.

I welcome all comments.

[sschechter]

I think arbitrarily burning funds is stupid.  It only makes sense from a value perspective when everyone knows exactly what has been burned.  There is no depreciation if we can't track exactly whats been burned.  If your friend drops $1 down in the sewer, it doesn't make your $1 more valuable.  In abstract theory, maybe, but in practice, it has no effect.

[Thom]

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

You don't burn by sending to an address. There's a burn command in the CLI:

Code: [Select]

wallet_burn <amount_to_burn> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous]
Burns given amount to the given account.  This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.                                                 


Bummer. That means I can't simply replace gentso's address in the payroll config to burn his funds. Looks like I need to modify the payroll plugin in bts_tools in order to automate this burn process. That should be easy. Thanks PC for the info.

From what I see now it looks like the consensus is for burning all 85% of gentso's delegate pay.

If that holds true by tomorrow I will redirect that pay to the burn bucket.

What address constitutes a verifiable burn address? I tried to search for "burn" and "burn address" here in the forum but could not find such an address. What's the best way to accomplish burning funds now?

Your poll is not really fair... You have a hole bunch of options that say to distribute the funds, but only 1 option to destroy the funds.  This is forcing the voters who would like to see them used for something to spread out their votes.

The more realistic poll results would be:

16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work
14-Burn

I respectfully but emphatically disagree lil_jay.

I provided many options, including the 2 last options where you can express exactly how you want the funds redirected (specify your desires in this thread).

I don't understand your proposal. You failed to say WHICH delegate should receive the funds (16- Distribute to a delegate to use for work), and that's the primary reason for this poll.

I think your objection is a moot point anyway, as it looks like the majority of those voting want the funds burned (15 out of 32 voting as of now) rather than redirected.

If these results stand at the end of the mumble, I will change the payroll plugin to burn gentso's portion.

[Pheonike]

The majority of people want it to be distributed, so as long and the the total is more than burn you should consider picking the highest distribution option.