Using the prediction market to prioritize worker proposals and add liquidity

[SpiritofJefferson]

The problem with that idea is that a proposal that people find unlikely to increase the BTS price will probably not be implemented and the prediction can never be settled. Or did I miss something?

Ah, I honestly forgot about that. In Robin Hanson's paper that money is refunded, but with how bitshares currently is it might be difficult.. Are there any prediction asset permissions that might allow this? Or would it matter if it was just settled at whatever it was at the time limit? I've been wondering this too actually.
Some other problems with it are deciding when to start the prediction market, when to end it, and how we can decide to stop paying for it if we don't like it. I have a few ideas of how we could do this which I mentioned before. But again, I'm not an expert by any means. Another thing is that you can't just have it track the price automatically because the price might move due to external forces having nothing to do with the proposal. This is why we need the time limit on how long the market can exist. All of this aside, I'm thinking we could even just do this now informally just to help aggregate information for the shareholders to act on. This might be the easiest and best decision. Plus it would be way less complicated.

Also, I just realized I accidentally misused the word liquidity. I meant that it would increase the use of the DEX and profit bitshares in increased trading. My bad everyone

[pc]

The problem with that idea is that a proposal that people find unlikely to increase the BTS price will probably not be implemented and the prediction can never be settled. Or did I miss something?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Novel concept to consider.

Curious to see what others think.

Thanks for the great suggestion! 

[SpiritofJefferson]

     This community is amazing in the sense that we really have a say in what goes on, and we can actually impact the direction and development of our coin. This is a revolutionary feature, but the question we must always remind ourselves to ask is, can we do better?

     I've been doing a lot of thinking on futarchy and how it might look if we applied it to the blockchain. We could have the shareholders vote for proposals like they do now, but we could also apportion part of the daily budget to funding proposals above/under certain vote thresholds. The proposals would each have a corresponding prediction market, and each would have yes and no tokens. If you think the bitshares price will go up as a result of this proposal, buy a yes token, but if you think there are other better projects to focus on at the moment, buy a no token. The market with the highest price difference where yes > no wins, and the yes holders profit (or if they're wrong, the no holders profit). This lets someone bet on what feature will profit bitshares the most and put their money where their mouth is. It would also help us to prioritize our worker proposals, and would even be great for liquidity.

     Everyone talks about voter participation being a problem, but if we have a market incentive for people to make smart decisions, we don't have to worry about it as much anymore. The voters would still be able to impact what is considered and would have control over the committee. The prediction market would also draw a lot of liquidity and likely profit bitshares just through the trading fees. It would also get people to use the wallet, which may even get them to trade in other markets. We already have a prediction market feature, and I think if this idea is already halfway built we should really look into doing this. We could even just test this out and run some prediction markets alongside our current governance so we can potentially come to a more informed decision.

     I do see an issue where we'd be locked into funding the project (since the markets need to have a decision made), but we could maybe set a certain veto percentage to stop the funding if we needed to. Just an off the top fix; I honestly have no idea if this is the best way to do it. We may have some more pressing issues to deal with at the moment but I think we should seriously consider this for a future proposal if it is indeed possible. @bytemaster might there be any downsides to doing this, and how difficult would this be to implement? I have a sneaking suspicion it would still be very difficult even with the prediction market operational. I'm a terrible programmer so I'm not even gonna try to do this myself . Anyway, I'm just curious as to what the community thinks.

P.S. Vitalik has a blog post on the subject and you can google the creator of futarchy to watch some videos or read his paper on it. His name is Robin Hanson. Just for some reference on the subject.