4.0 投票机制变化

[binggo]

so why submit the voting for these 4 features immediately?

Because the voting results would be diffrent with the new voting system and the main reason
bitshares protocol has been completly broken.

Today the voting system and what will come tomorrow if you accept something like that ?

Who is going to hold money in a system where a single person can decide about everything and make your investment worthless with no information,voting or announcement ?

Also what has been done so something like that can't happen again ?

The new voting system is totaly immature and has some features which are dangerous.



Also in my opinion witnesses are not being forced but its basicly their duty to be the keeper that cheats in code can't be added into bitshares.They gurantee the security of bitshares.

Why this happened i think you should  know that very clearly, most of developer had leave away BTS as they very disappointed the whole design of management, the whole system was controlled by a group people and cheating the system, especially the vote of collateral, when the vote power of collateral become more and more bigger as the price rising, who can stop them? who can stop them don't cheate the system again and again?

A shareholder made a pledge of stocks to the company, then he used the money to buy the stocks again, make this cycle again and again, so you want give this guy the power to manage this company?

Yes the wittness maintain the security of bitshares, but they should clearly know which is the best for the system, when the the shareholder of bts make a cheating decision like freeze the feed price, they should say no, but they didn't, when the cheating vote like VP of collateral and BAIP voting happend they should say no, the committee should say no, but they didn't.

Why no body ask how many collateral votes were real under the freezed feed price? is this not a cheating for the system? is it not dangerous for the system?

The danger of the fake and leverage VP of collateral is more dangerous than the new voting system.

I think some ideas may come from BM:
https://medium.com/@bytemaster/blockchain-governance-proposal-470478e42686

To ensure a long-term outlook and “skin in the game”, only tokens locked in a long-term staking contract qualify for voting.

Few people will want to give up liquidity for 10 years so they will earn a higher relative yield and more power over the network. More people will be willing to give up liquidity for 3 months, so they will get a lower yield and less power.

[bitcrab]

Also in my opinion witnesses are not being forced but its basicly their duty to be the keeper that cheats in code can't be added into bitshares.They gurantee the security of bitshares.

right, this is the more political correct statement.

[Thul3]

so why submit the voting for these 4 features immediately?

Because the voting results would be diffrent with the new voting system and the main reason
bitshares protocol has been completly broken.

Today the voting system and what will come tomorrow if you accept something like that ?

Who is going to hold money in a system where a single person can decide about everything and make your investment worthless with no information,voting or announcement ?

Also what has been done so something like that can't happen again ?

The new voting system is totaly immature and has some features which are dangerous.



Also in my opinion witnesses are not being forced but its basicly their duty to be the keeper that cheats in code can't be added into bitshares.They gurantee the security of bitshares.

[binggo]

所谓的共识早就消亡。

票权衰减，一票一投，锁仓都是细枝末节无关紧要的东西。

而抵押与挂单必须无票权，这是最重要的的东西，让交易行为去决定治理行为本身就是一个区块链上最为傻叉的行为，就好比证监会的工作人员一边炒股一边管理股市一样，顺便还玩杠杆借贷，一个公司的股东股票质押完再去回购股票然后再质押再回购，然后还要给全额投票权，最后公司怕是怎么死的都不知道。

人身上长了一颗毒瘤，要切的时候还要问一下毒瘤的意见与感受，跟与狐谋皮何异？！

要么各自分叉单过，反正分叉在将来是不可避免的事件，想留抵押与挂单票权简直做梦！

为什么会发生这种事情，有些人还没有回过味来，那是因为bts离心离德到根本没有开发care，公会可以继续秀！

[bitcrab]

据我所知，由于公会认为abit的改动侵害了公会的利益，也违背了公链的共识，目前正在准备开发patch，将投票机制变化这部分先以patch的方式关掉。

公会的计划是，先去除掉不在开发计划内的功能，然后再按正常流程投票对这几项功能进行取舍，再进行升级。

在我看来，票权衰减，一票一投这两项应该通过概率很大，锁仓也不小，抵押和挂单无票权这两项应该通不过。

既然如此，何不当下就把4项功能分开投票，以作取舍？ @abit

as I know, cn-vote is preparing a patch to remove the unplanned 4 features which are added to 4.0 release, and force witnesses to install.

and then, they will submit vote for the 4 features for the one new release again.

in my view, vote decay, 1 power 1 vote are in high possibility to be passed, deposit lock is also not low, "collateral and order no power" should not be approved.

so why submit the voting for these 4 features immediately?

[binggo]

锁仓对工会完全没有影响，工会也可以锁仓，票也是公平的，又不是针对公会，是大家都同样条件的。 这功能牛逼哄哄的，比减半币要牛逼得多了，永久的牛逼下去，要飞了。要飞，为了票，这下锁仓要打破头，要流血了，要牛逼了，要飞了。BTS要报复性上涨了，这次下车的人基本被甩下车了，后面的路一片美好，上涨空间无限。

CN-VOTE 没有抵押的筹码算算也有至少3千万，也算是一个大票仓了。

[xixi002020]

甘少炒币炒出人格分裂了,abit要负全责

[lovegan007]

锁仓对工会完全没有影响，工会也可以锁仓，票也是公平的，又不是针对公会，是大家都同样条件的。 这功能牛逼哄哄的，比减半币要牛逼得多了，永久的牛逼下去，要飞了。要飞，为了票，这下锁仓要打破头，要流血了，要牛逼了，要飞了。BTS要报复性上涨了，这次下车的人基本被甩下车了，后面的路一片美好，上涨空间无限。

[lovegan007]

重大利好，BTS要飞了，赶紧梭哈，之前是我没理解abit，现在理解了，abit干得漂亮，为BTS增加了一个牛逼的功能，这下想不飞都难了，这功能完美，牛逼，比TM的减半还要牛逼得多了，BTS不涨上2块钱，天理难容啊。

[binggo]

Now can use BTS++ v6.2 to creat locked vote position

----------------------------------------------

BitShares移动端钱包 / BTS++ v6.2 更新 （iOS和安卓均以更新）。
更新日志
  1、新增创建锁仓投票功能。
  2、资产界面添加【锁仓】入口。
  3、部分BUG修复。增强稳定性。

官网APP下载地址：https://app.btspp.io/
GooglePlay地址：http://t.cn/EMb19J7
官网：https://btspp.io/en/index.html
电报：https://t.me/btsplusplus
GitHub源代码仓库：https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-mobile-app

-----------------------

对于我们这些韭菜，永久锁仓一个bts意思一下就行了

[时光旅行机]

能涨就行，管他娘的，巨蟹不也偷偷改锁喂价

[binggo]

I would claim that majority of bitshares users have no idea how to use cli wallet based on my personal experience.

This means they have already a disadvantage in the voting system against the few who use it.

Maybe need to fund UI?

but i think who didn‘t have locked forever positions can support the wittness then he gets the full normal VP may be more better and easy, one wittness one vote.


简易中文cli_wallet教程，没有电脑动手能力及时间的话，只看看就好:
https://github.com/shulthz/BTS-/issues/1

[Thul3]

I would claim that majority of bitshares users have no idea how to use cli wallet based on my personal experience.

This means they have already a disadvantage in the voting system against the few who use it.

[binggo]

偏题的话：
任何投票机制都不能够阻止大票仓的行为，这是DPOS机制中致命性的缺陷，随着筹码的财阀化及利用人贪便宜的心思用各种空投来取得大票仓，最终都会导致DPOS越来越趋向中心化控制，想要摆脱这种缺陷，只能是重新设计一套合理的见证机制，足够多的见证人数量，足够高的抗攻击操控成本，让见证人尽量摆脱票仓控制，让见证人投票来决定系统的一切方向。当然这只是我个人的想法。


像这个投票机制最大的作用是将BTS从滑向抵押票权的深渊中拉了回来，至于锁仓时间获得的票权越多是否合适，这要看锁仓所消耗的时间成本设计是否能够抵挡人性中的贪婪。

关键是找出锁仓人最可能的作恶时间点在什么时候？

这种锁仓时间获取倍数越多我感觉并不是太好，很容易会形成一个大票仓锁了横行的局面，导致一言堂，其它自由投票人失去投票积极性，投票有效性大幅降低。而且并不是锁定越多越好，锁的太多会严重影响流动性...

[matle85]

Big holders like beos or alt can lock for 360 days 100million bts which is not an issue and get 400 million votes +  remaining 200 milliion votes.Who is going to oppose them ?Where do you find on the other side 100 million bts willing to lock  ?
Such a system favours big holders giving them the opportunity to get even more stronger if there is such a will from their side.


Also BTS was created as utlity token with the funcionality to be used as collateral and main currency on DEX.This voting system is in deny with that functionality as you can't participate in the ecosystem creating bitassets and getting at the same time the same amount of votes as being inactive to participate in bitshares progress.


A general question.

Is a BTS holder who doesn't use his BTS better than somebody who uses his BTS in bitshares ecosystem for which it was constructed ?
The simple holder non active member gets a benefit of up to 8 times VP from his BTS where the active member who is using his BTS activly on bitshares dex gets punished for it?

A non active member should have the possibility to have up to 8 times more voting power than an active member ?


Do we really favor inactive members over active members?

I think that the lock mechanism will be used by some big holders so there will be some unintended consequences - I guess that by locking their BTS they are at least now committed tangibly to the long term performance of the chain and the impact of their voting... I suppose the hope is also that the 'locked' BTS will increase scarcity and help drive the price up.

Re: the collateral point - in the existing (previous?) system debt holders end up with a disproportianately large vote (based on debt + new BTS they buy with that debt) which they are then able to use to dictate the functioning of the chain and artificially protect the debt positions. Thats a complete failure of the system.

One option would be to include bitUSD, bitCNY etc in voting weight so holders of these assets are not left out of the voting system. I guess that could also have some unintended consequences (someone holding a lot of bitUSD might want to push the price down). It is very hard when financial incentives and governance overlaps as things become very messy, separating them out as far as practical is probably a good idea.