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

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I did hear back from wackou this morning and we are both very enthusiastic about a partnership!

He is traveling and his Internet connectivity is minimal for the next week or so, but I will be posting a separate thread to outline our new joint proposal for our combined delegate efforts.

I feel strongly about the possibilities for this new alliance and the value it will bring to the BItShares ecosystem. I will be releasing all of gentso's funds I have held to wackou and will be updating the delegate payroll to reflect this partnership. I will be more specific in the forthcoming proposal.

I was able to purchase 2 VPS accounts and completed the required setup to move delegate.verbaltech onto one of them late last night, however there is an issue with ntp I need to resolve before putting verbaltech online on that vps. In testing with test.verbaltech the 1.6 second time offset was causing other peer nodes to reject the blocks, according to the error message. I didn't have time to work it out but will be looking into it later today.

That vps is a 3GB RAM, 3 CPU core, OpenVZ architecture system, which is not the best architecture for this type of application. The other VPS is KVM but with only 2GB, 2 CPU core, so it may be better suited as a delegate host. I was actually very impressed with the performance of the OpenVZ vps and it synchronized much faster than I expected. Due to the time difference I took the node offline until I can resolve the clock issue, which is mainly a matter of submitting a ticket to the hosting provider to resolve.

I just wanted to tie a nice little bow on this thread and say stay tuned for further developments in another thread coming soon where I will describe our efforts in detail.

Thanks for the suggestion of this partnership and to everyone for participating in this discussion.

You need more RAM.. if you want your delegate to run smooth it should have 4GB.. 2 cores is fine.. 4 cores come in handy when you need to rescan for whatever reason.

Also.. do not use OpenVZ for a delegate.. if a VM is going to be used only VM tech that would be acceptable is Xen, KVM, or VMware. If you use OpenVZ you are going to get shutdown again for over use and/or have so much contention you will miss blocks.

Your NTP issues are likely related to this.

Do NOT use swap or you are going to cause too much IO.

I am glad wackou is onboard.. I am looking forward to the new proposal announcement.

[Thom]

I did hear back from wackou this morning and we are both very enthusiastic about a partnership!

He is traveling and his Internet connectivity is minimal for the next week or so, but I will be posting a separate thread to outline our new joint proposal for our combined delegate efforts.

I feel strongly about the possibilities for this new alliance and the value it will bring to the BItShares ecosystem. I will be releasing all of gentso's funds I have held to wackou and will be updating the delegate payroll to reflect this partnership. I will be more specific in the forthcoming proposal.

I was able to purchase 2 VPS accounts and completed the required setup to move delegate.verbaltech onto one of them late last night, however there is an issue with ntp I need to resolve before putting verbaltech online on that vps. In testing with test.verbaltech the 1.6 second time offset was causing other peer nodes to reject the blocks, according to the error message. I didn't have time to work it out but will be looking into it later today.

That vps is a 3GB RAM, 3 CPU core, OpenVZ architecture system, which is not the best architecture for this type of application. The other VPS is KVM but with only 2GB, 2 CPU core, so it may be better suited as a delegate host. I was actually very impressed with the performance of the OpenVZ vps and it synchronized much faster than I expected. Due to the time delta I took the node offline until I can resolve the clock issue, which is mainly a matter of submitting a ticket to the hosting provider to resolve. The OpenVZ vps is located in Germany and the other in the USA. I wanted them both in Europe but the provider ran out of available resources in Germany so I had to go with LA. These VPSs were purchased more for graphene testing than for delegate.verbaltech, so delegate.verbaltech will probably be moved several times before it finds an optimal, cost effective and reliable home.

I just wanted to tie a nice little bow on this thread and say stay tuned for further developments in another thread coming soon where I will describe our efforts in detail.

Thanks for the suggestion of this partnership and to everyone for participating in this discussion.

[Thom]

Looks like the majority of people chose to redistribute 26-22 and of those the  "10% to 38PTSWarior, 21% to bitsharesbreakout, 18% to btstools.digitalgaia, 18% to fav, 18% to Bunkermining" seems to be the majority choice.

Wow. Have you ever thought about a job in politics? Calling 6 out of 48 (at this time)  a majority is a level of bullshit that I haven't even heard from politicians after they lost an election.

This is the very perspective I had when I was accused of going against consensus. The only consensus I saw was to burn, based solely on the magnitude of numbers in any one particular choice. Isn't it interesting how people draw such different conclusions about these poll results?

I do see the other point of view now tho, that if you sum the votes in all of the other categories they outnumber the burn category. But like you PC, I don't consider that a consensus.

I sent a message to wackou about the potential of a partnership. I may not hear back from him until Monday. Although such a partnership is not aligned with the original proposal for verbaltech, I do think it makes good sense. If he is open to the idea it becomes a matter of how much of the 85% would be directed his way or anywhere else. Given the marketcap right now it may be best to concentrate the funds on one effort. I'm not locked into any course of action at the moment. Let's see what wackou has to say about it.

As for the need to stick with the original purpose, I don't think that's necessary at this juncture, nor was it a consideration for any of the other delegates that redirected their pay. For purists it might be objectionable, but this is not a community of purists by my observation. If the forthcoming revised proposal for verbaltech is unacceptable in any way the shareholders can vote me out. Look at this entire exercise as my attempt to allow the community to influence that proposal before I revise it. The shareholders can veto it at any time.

I think it's also important to realize all of the existing delegates including verbaltech will be re-evaluated when 2.0 arrives, so this redirection is only temporary. With the marketcap going to all time lows it doesn't amount to much expense until that happens.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Here's another suggestion for interpreting the votes:

Fortunately you put precise numbers on the choices. That makes it possible to compute relations.

Ignoring the two bottom choices with 0 votes you have 10 options for distributing 85% of the funds each.
"Burn all" received 22/48 votes,  so you'll burn 22/48 * 85% of the funds.
"30% to btstools.digitalgaia and 55% to Bunkermining" received 4 votes, so you'll give 4/48 * 30% to digitalgaia and 4/48 * 55% to DSN.
"All to Bunkermining" received 3 votes, so you'll give another 3/48 * 85% to DSN.

And so on.

That's an interesting way to calculate. It distributes based on the results. Another way it could be done.. and be a living result.. as long as people can change their votes in the poll. Assumes we don't have troll/socket puppets influencing it.. but it would hold true to consensus with that kind of breakdown. Going to be more work for Thom, but only requires once a month / bi-weekly maintenance.

I stil prefer my previous solution of Thom working with wackou at this point though.

[38PTSWarrior]

I voted option 9

[pc]

Here's another suggestion for interpreting the votes:

Fortunately you put precise numbers on the choices. That makes it possible to compute relations.

Ignoring the two bottom choices with 0 votes you have 10 options for distributing 85% of the funds each.
"Burn all" received 22/48 votes,  so you'll burn 22/48 * 85% of the funds.
"30% to btstools.digitalgaia and 55% to Bunkermining" received 4 votes, so you'll give 4/48 * 30% to digitalgaia and 4/48 * 55% to DSN.
"All to Bunkermining" received 3 votes, so you'll give another 3/48 * 85% to DSN.

And so on.

[pc]

Looks like the majority of people chose to redistribute 26-22 and of those the  "10% to 38PTSWarior, 21% to bitsharesbreakout, 18% to btstools.digitalgaia, 18% to fav, 18% to Bunkermining" seems to be the majority choice.

Wow. Have you ever thought about a job in politics? Calling 6 out of 48 (at this time)  a majority is a level of bullshit that I haven't even heard from politicians after they lost an election.

[pc]

Gentso's delegate was voted in because of his proposal. If the proposal can't be fulfilled anymore, a responsible delegate should announce that fact, ask shareholders to be voted out, and burn the earnings

Casting a forum poll on how to spend the funds *differently from the original proposal* is a violation of the original proposal, and can therefore be seen as betrayal.

To clarify what I mean here:
Once a delegate has been voted in and is earning money, it is in his own responsibility to use the funds in a way that is compatible with his original proposal. Note that unspecific proposals may allow for a wide range of interpretations. I'd speak of betrayal only when the actual use of the funds is *clearly* not compatible with the proposal.

So do whatever *you* have a clear conscience with.

[Thom]

Glad you were able to secure Cryptosmith jsidhu. Do you have control of the domain name & hosting account or did gentso not share that with you?

If you don't it might be a good idea to take a snapshot / backup of the site in case gentso decides to shutdown that site also.

As for the suggestion about delegate partnerships, I'm very open to that. Thanks for the suggestion donkeypong!

I actually really like DSN's suggestion to partner with Wackou. I'll touch base with Wackou and see if he is open to that and explore possibilities.

[jsidhu]

cryptosmith set to maintenance mode

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Kudos to Thom for being up-front about this and giving the community a choice. I would say it's less about re-directing funds, though, and more about you finding a new delegate partner. If this is purely a short-term arrangement, then I'm not opposed to one of your suggestions for re-directing funds, but if this continues beyond 2.0, then time to re-start the delegate.

By process of elimination, I would eliminate DataSecurityNode from consideration. He does a lot of good things and may well be deserving, but from the comments, you guys don't get along. No sense running such a partnership together with Thom, even for a short period of time.

I say burn it or give it to 30PTSW.

Haha.. Thom and I have no problem getting along.

He just chose to start hurling unfounded emotional accusations at me when I started to say that the delegate should be allowed to die if the consensus that was voted on was not going to be followed. You can track back and see that.

He went on the defensive because of all the options, that is not the one he wants to happen.. he wants to keep that 15% at least as he stated (tough times as he said). I got no problem with that, and I already said he started by doing the right thing, its a matter of doing right by voters here and I just think more can be done. Trying to turn off Thoms accusations mode though is like trying to stop verbal diarrhea.

To expand on your suggestion to partner up though, I had thought about the same thing. I think an ideal fit would be (if wackou agrees) to have Thom work with wackou on bts_tools seeing as Thom says he is a software developer. Wackou keeps getting bumped out of the 101 with his 30% delegate. If there is any 100% delegate that is an ideal fit that will move into a witness/worker in 2.0 it's wackous delegate for bts_tools and his anti-DDOS delegate network.

I think his delegate could do MUCH better with 85% to work with. I have had discussions with him regarding the anti-ddos network plan he has for delegates and it requires numerous network nodes. That extra 55% delegate pay would be enough even in this market cap to establish enough nodes for a starting network.

Thom would be happy to dive into doing something he enjoys, software developing.

Wackous delegate is next in line to be voted in, so this would also be in line with social consensus based on votes.

So if a new proposal is going to be brought forth, THIS is the one I would vote for.

It makes the most sense, and serves the voters best and enriches the BitShares network.

This of course is contingent on wackou agreeing to work with Thom. If this happens, I will gladly reinstate my votes for this delegate.

If there is another poll or some like in the future making, please do consider this to be an option.

I also ask to put personal bullshit aside and consider putting BitShares first in such a decision. ie. don't throw out the solution just because it came from me and would have to say 'thanks DSN' ... We are on the same side here.

[Thom]

Looks like the majority of people chose to redistribute 26-22 and of those the  "10% to 38PTSWarior, 21% to bitsharesbreakout, 18% to btstools.digitalgaia, 18% to fav, 18% to Bunkermining" seems to be the majority choice.

Thanks to everybody for your contributions. I concur with Pheonike, that the majority have voted to redistribute, tho scattered among many options as to how it should be done. I also agree that burning those funds would be a waste. Although it would benefit the entire ecosystem as a deflationary measure, that was obviously not the intention of those who originally voted for delegate.verbaltech.

I think Stan's input was the most constructive. I will draft a new proposal for this delegate over the weekend and post it for all to review and comment on. If the community likes it I will act accordingly, otherwise I'll leave it up to the community to terminate the delegate by voting it out.

As always, I'll keep you informed.

[montpelerin]

Looks like the majority of the very small minority of the bitshares community that actually voted in this thread chose to redistribute 26-22 and of those the  "10% to 38PTSWarior, 21% to bitsharesbreakout, 18% to btstools.digitalgaia, 18% to fav, 18% to Bunkermining" seems to be the majority choice.

Slight correction.

Let's not forget about incentives and which votes may carry greater gain for the individual voters themselves vs gain for bitshares as a whole.

Let's also not forget that there is no way (other than maybe mods or admin using IP, and we know nobody is this community would have access to multiple rigs using different IP's)  to determine which votes may have been made with alternate or multiple user accounts.

Example: I have voted in this thread, but only with 1 account and not with this one

I chose to burn because I see value in keeping constructively critical members like Thom running a delegate.

With that said, I do believe 38PTSWarrior, bitsharesbreakout, digitalgaia and fav to all be more than worthy and deserving of a delegate spot 

[Pheonike]

Looks like the majority of people chose to redistribute 26-22 and of those the  "10% to 38PTSWarior, 21% to bitsharesbreakout, 18% to btstools.digitalgaia, 18% to fav, 18% to Bunkermining" seems to be the majority choice.

[hodor]

Kudos to Thom for being up-front about this and giving the community a choice. I would say it's less about re-directing funds, though, and more about you finding a new delegate partner. If this is purely a short-term arrangement, then I'm not opposed to one of your suggestions for re-directing funds, but if this continues beyond 2.0, then time to re-start the delegate.

By process of elimination, I would eliminate DataSecurityNode from consideration. He does a lot of good things and may well be deserving, but from the comments, you guys don't get along. No sense running such a partnership together with Thom, even for a short period of time.

I say burn it or give it to 30PTSW.

 

Hodor