Main > Stakeholder Proposals
Proxy: bitshares-vision
bench:
Why have
bsip72 - Tanks and Taps: Smart Contract Asset Handling
and
bsip64 - Optional HTLC preimage length and hashes (needed for native coin integration)
so low voting weight ?
Ammar Yousef (ioBanker):
--- Quote from: abit on November 04, 2019, 08:11:30 pm ---
--- Quote from: Ammar Yousef (ioBanker) on November 04, 2019, 01:27:15 am ---
--- Quote from: abit on November 04, 2019, 12:51:57 am ---
--- Quote from: bench on November 03, 2019, 07:41:38 pm ---
--- Quote from: Bangzi on November 02, 2019, 12:51:05 pm ---Please consider vote for Worker: 1.14.236 BAIP-Threshold to increase the number of votes required, one of the criteria to pass a BAIP(BitAssets Improvement Proposal).
--- End quote ---
At the moment bitshares-vision sees no benifit in increasing the threshold.
--- End quote ---
I didn't think you could talk on behalf of bitshares-vision.
--- End quote ---
He's a part of bitshares-vision
I'm a fan of the idea behind segregating BitAssets parameter control from BSIP of code, I agree with the direction of having BAIP.
But as bench said, I don't see increasing number of required votes for anything would benefit bitshares now, this would let it be more harder to change these parameters while our utility token is still at early stage now.
I would always like to understand your point of view, why would we need to increase the threshold of votes required to pass a BAIP?
--- End quote ---
I didn't say that I agree or disagree to increase the threshold of BAIPs.
As commented in https://github.com/bitshares/baips/pull/2 , I don't think the BAIP-01 draft is ready for voting.
--- End quote ---
Thanks for stating you valuable opinion, bitshares-vision would consider readiness and reasoning behind voting.
abit:
--- Quote from: Ammar Yousef (ioBanker) on November 04, 2019, 01:27:15 am ---
--- Quote from: abit on November 04, 2019, 12:51:57 am ---
--- Quote from: bench on November 03, 2019, 07:41:38 pm ---
--- Quote from: Bangzi on November 02, 2019, 12:51:05 pm ---Please consider vote for Worker: 1.14.236 BAIP-Threshold to increase the number of votes required, one of the criteria to pass a BAIP(BitAssets Improvement Proposal).
--- End quote ---
At the moment bitshares-vision sees no benifit in increasing the threshold.
--- End quote ---
I didn't think you could talk on behalf of bitshares-vision.
--- End quote ---
He's a part of bitshares-vision
I'm a fan of the idea behind segregating BitAssets parameter control from BSIP of code, I agree with the direction of having BAIP.
But as bench said, I don't see increasing number of required votes for anything would benefit bitshares now, this would let it be more harder to change these parameters while our utility token is still at early stage now.
I would always like to understand your point of view, why would we need to increase the threshold of votes required to pass a BAIP?
--- End quote ---
I didn't say that I agree or disagree to increase the threshold of BAIPs.
As commented in https://github.com/bitshares/baips/pull/2 , I don't think the BAIP-01 draft is ready for voting.
sschiessl:
--- Quote from: Ammar Yousef (ioBanker) on November 04, 2019, 01:27:15 am ---I would always like to understand your point of view, why would we need to increase the threshold of votes required to pass a BAIP?
--- End quote ---
Same reason why a threshold for worker proposals makes sense. Keep an eye on it, just in case.
Ammar Yousef (ioBanker):
--- Quote from: abit on November 04, 2019, 12:51:57 am ---
--- Quote from: bench on November 03, 2019, 07:41:38 pm ---
--- Quote from: Bangzi on November 02, 2019, 12:51:05 pm ---Please consider vote for Worker: 1.14.236 BAIP-Threshold to increase the number of votes required, one of the criteria to pass a BAIP(BitAssets Improvement Proposal).
--- End quote ---
At the moment bitshares-vision sees no benifit in increasing the threshold.
--- End quote ---
I didn't think you could talk on behalf of bitshares-vision.
--- End quote ---
He's a part of bitshares-vision
I'm a fan of the idea behind segregating BitAssets parameter control from BSIP of code, I agree with the direction of having BAIP.
But as bench said, I don't see increasing number of required votes for anything would benefit bitshares now, this would let it be more harder to change these parameters while our utility token is still at early stage now.
I would always like to understand your point of view, why would we need to increase the threshold of votes required to pass a BAIP?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version