Author Topic: [Poll] Plan C: release new version with the unplanned features processed  (Read 28242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
If staking is removed for now then the only winner is proper governance / consensus.

I'm open to discussions on staking and how it can protect from exchanges etc but I think really that part needs a lot of thought.

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
I will just steal Thule's listing format:

vote decay          YES
collateral            YES
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            No - needs some thought about weighting etc, let's figure that out first.

Way of implementation    - we need to figure out how this vulnerability is closed in the future. I agree with Bitcrab that Abit wasn't doing evil and I'm actually glad someone has stepped up but really it shouldn't be possible for one person to make such big changes.

Ill vote on chain when I'm at my computer.

The solution I suspect is probably that witnesses will have to do some due diligence on deployment in the future so the process of reviewing updates is more decentralised.

Part of this may be the calibre of witness - cn-vote brought in witnesses who agree to give them part of their pay and we lost witnesses like clockwork, does anyone think clockwork would have missed this change?

Maybe the corrupt voting of witnesses is part of what let this happen.

Alternatively we code in some additional payment to witnesses that they get at each release to pay for the time they spend on this review or something if we feel it is too much to ask of them otherwise.

or
liondani or terradac.
Providing simple VPS and even not participating in bithares.

Best witnesses we can get.But who is blaming BEOS or the chinese guy outside from cn-vote who made the inside deal ?

Simple question

Is BEOS currently voting reasonable or do they only vote for self benefit ?
Inside deals on witnesses
Inside deals on committee who are over 1 1/2 year inactive.
How do you perfom control function as committee if these people are inactive ?
Supporting scam workers.Denying to vote what even own community wants.
Wanting funding from reserve pool for BEOS
Very bad reputation

So why exectly would one give them more voting power ?

Who dumped again 60-80 millions of BTS ?


Lets compare Dima vs BEOS

Dima builds on bitshares and brings community of active traders.Developing for free gateway and mobile app.Even a trading bot
He is going to lose majority of his support.


And we have BEOS doing nothing only putting themself into good positions without providing anything or participating in anything.
Their VP in total increases against before and they get the ability to stake since they don't do anything with their BTS.

Is this a fair system ?

How much time did we gave one of our biggest proxy OL to ask his voters to update their vote to not lose completly voting power to have  a say in stacking feature?

Also from the logic of the new voting system?
Who is the winner in general of these changes ?Clearly not the average community member but the big stake holders increasing their influence even bigger.

Quote
So it's best to fork.

Didn't community already showed that they have no more trust in you guys ?
Rudex having more liquidity and volume without MM contest than you when paying to trade on gdex from committee funds.
How much more proof do you need ?

Who is going to follow you ?Foreigners who call you scammer or cn-vote members ?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 11:41:30 am by Thul3 »

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Alas, talking too much is meaningless...fear 170 not fear 270...

大海航行靠舵手,让韭菜们自己选船坐吧...

how much is 170 x stacking ?

Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
I will just steal Thule's listing format:

vote decay          YES
collateral            YES
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            No - needs some thought about weighting etc, let's figure that out first.

Way of implementation    - we need to figure out how this vulnerability is closed in the future. I agree with Bitcrab that Abit wasn't doing evil and I'm actually glad someone has stepped up but really it shouldn't be possible for one person to make such big changes.

Ill vote on chain when I'm at my computer.

The solution I suspect is probably that witnesses will have to do some due diligence on deployment in the future so the process of reviewing updates is more decentralised.

Part of this may be the calibre of witness - cn-vote brought in witnesses who agree to give them part of their pay and we lost witnesses like clockwork, does anyone think clockwork would have missed this change?

Maybe the corrupt voting of witnesses is part of what let this happen.

Alternatively we code in some additional payment to witnesses that they get at each release to pay for the time they spend on this review or something if we feel it is too much to ask of them otherwise.


Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • 世间太多瘪犊子
    • View Profile
Alas, talking too much is meaningless...fear 170 not fear 270...

大海航行靠舵手,让韭菜们自己选船坐吧...


Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
I will just steal Thule's listing format:

vote decay          YES
collateral            YES
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            No - needs some thought about weighting etc, let's figure that out first.

Way of implementation    - we need to figure out how this vulnerability is closed in the future. I agree with Bitcrab that Abit wasn't doing evil and I'm actually glad someone has stepped up but really it shouldn't be possible for one person to make such big changes.

Ill vote on chain when I'm at my computer.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4667
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Blah blah blah


You need to understand there are two group in bitshares.

...

These two groups can't fit together ...

So it's best to fork.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Quote
The biggest fear of a lot of foreign businesses is the increase of power of beos/dl .They want increase of power for the whole community against big proxies and not another group (which is openly celebrating these changes) which they consider worse than cn-vote.

I didn't get these information from foreign businesses, many businesses seems support these changes.


This is  the vote power now, let's the data talk:

beos:          70.0M
baozi:         53.3M
B-DEX:        47.5M
CN-VOTE:    237.0M

So you can tell us which foreign businesses have this fear about beos?!

The vote power of BEOS is 270M in 2019, now only have 170M bts on beos account, why did they fear BEOS, noe fear CN-VOTE?!

The highest vote power of CN-VOTE is 271M, only have 30M BTS is not leveraged collateral.

Fair vote.

I can tell you many businesses however i doubt they want to be named public as these conversations are always in private chats.
2 businesses who have knowingly big issues with dl and beos are for example Palmpay or Rudex.
The gateways who have been threatened by DL to be kicked out over a longer period of time people seem to not know.
Ask foreigners in bitsharesdex channel what they think about BEOS.
You will hear that S word.
Ask people there what they think about DL and his KYC and centralization plan ?
Majority say they can't be so dumb to really execute their plan as bitshares would be gone quickly.
Ask Palmpay how quickly he would fork away when BEOS/DL should be in control.
Or if Rudex will keep building ?
Or if old core members will stay at bitshars when BEOS gets control.

Everyone knows even from past private chats which have been leaked that BEOS is looking to get control over reserve pool to finance BEOS.

Here a snippet what goes arround old members

Quote
Michael Taggart (aka "Murderistic", "Michael X", "fromzer0t0her0") is getting away with blatantly defrauding thousands of consumers. The law will catch up with you and others. There comes a time where you can no longer hide behind calling everything “FUD.” - Aenigma Capital
 
1) adventure marketing llc
2) pr guerrilla
3) rock steady inc
4) bitcoin united, btc-u
5) dac marketing llc
6) steem cash
7) infinite markets llc
8) landmark technologies
9) accrusoft webinars (with matt trainer)
10) island paradise llc
11) all-in-one seo
12) fake referrer generator tlt (youtube)
13) fake poll bots, web summit etc.
14) lotto shares (customers refunded)
15) mogul - build your invisible empire (a game?)
16) banx mint, banx shares, banx platinum, banx mining, banx capital ponzi (with mark lyford)
17) entrepreneur action (as per ian demartino)
18) steem voting bot (unpaid. blames it on mark lyford)
19) bitcoin latina
20) sovereign hero ponzi
21) arise bank, arisen, agov, afood, awater, avote, abank, arisecoin, aco/rsn, eaco (with jared rice)
22) dweb, dbank, dchurch, dgov, etc (with jared rice. major copyright/license disputes)
23) bench, bench wallet, etc (with jared rice)
24) remittio
25) ruon
26) sovereignsky (cubesats crashing into satellites)
27) missionspaceone
28) quintric gold and silver (public audits are denied), quint, quints, quintx, iquint, iquints, quintcard
29) biquitous
30) cloudcoin?
31) stokens (with john gotts)
32) eosstealth
33) eristica
34) hypernomex
35) stealthgrid, stealthcrypto, stealthcloud, stealthiot
36) beos (a $13B valuation? crypto connie show- "20% of eos" (all videos deleted)), no multisig, wif key access issues, airdrops for votes..
37) btsmd (illegal profits, and "lost keys")
38) btsma
39) manna
40) payger (with chris4210)
41) qfund security token
42) ..?
 
"To me, if one is constantly accused of been a scammer, and his defense all the more defensive.. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to work it out." - @D4vegee, Bitsharestalk

I could also add pictures of past private convos with their intentions.

You see now why foreigners don't want BEOS to get in control ?
You got of course some service providers who hope with the help of BEOS to get their workers approved.

Let me tell you something.BEOS has complelty no clue what they are talking or doing.They are good talkers and nothing more.
Mainly looking for their self benefit and BEOS is the complete opposite to bitshares fundamentals.
You give BEOS power you can be sure majority of foreigners will leave sooner or later.Old members will leave sooner.

Maybe ask how many people including businesses have been threatened by Beos to get sued when not stopping to provide information about BEOS.

Quote
The vote power of BEOS is 270M in 2019, now only have 170M bts on beos account, why did they fear BEOS, noe fear CN-VOTE?!

Why did it go back ?Because beos supporting scam workers,inside deals and refused to vote for getting pegg back for bitcny ?

Their members demanded their support for it which they denied.Instead they supported inside deals and workers from jademont like the scam exchange.
Thats the result of their voting habbits.
Ask these people who left BEOS why they did.I talk with them daily.

Also what happend to proxies like OL or Dima ?Nearly all voting power gone.
So a single guy decides who will keep his voting power and who not and who's will increase by stacking ?

Would everyone be stacking in cn-vote tell me who would be using DEX ?


Sorry i don't support malcious code added by a core member.If it fits me or not.I accept this one i indirectly support the next one giving hope that something like that can pass.
Another issue is its clearly favorising beos in the long run which majority of foreigners have a clear problem with.
Also the fud created from DL and Abit against CN-Vote is not acceptable.
Just read how both supported the wise actions of cn-vote a month ago to spread now such a fud.
It was Abit who defended cn-vote and their "wise" actions and banned anyone even admins who dared to question cn-votes voting.

I prefer to focus on real solutions which is getting after august 20th positive voting features voted in via BSIP by consensus.
And give  fresh blood which have been blocked for ages by members who keep milking the reserve pool and block any ideas which don't fit in their own agenda and centralization of bitshares arround them.


You need to understand there are two group in bitshares.

One big group who belive in decentralization and old fundamentals of bitshares
and a few people who hold key positions who want to centralize bitshares arround them.

These two groups can't fit together as the first group will never accept centralization and people like DL will never stop trying to centralize bitshares arround them.

« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 10:07:11 am by Thul3 »

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4667
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
In fact in most condition whether rule A or rule B is not a big deal to me.
What I really concern is the business based on core which make BTS more valuable like gdex\rudex\CNC\magicwallet...
I expected a stable core since years ago, but seems it's still not coming today.
If you expect something to happen, you'd better work towards it.

Act like a man.

BitShares' future is in your hands.

Quote

What abit had done is totally not acceptable in my opinion.
But it's already happen. I can accept the changes even some details is not reasonable to me.
The important thing is how to ensure our developer don't do it again.
Sure thing. What's your solution then?

Quote
I don't support fork, it's a disaster to all business based on BTS, what will happen to bitCNY/GDEX.BTC/CNC.. ?
Anybody  will have faith to build business on BTS in the future?
I wish you can resolve disputes, somebody can give a concession,  price will rise, BTS can have a good future.
You don't support fork, it's totally fine.

Anyway, actions speak louder than words.

You wish we can resolve it? You wish the price will rise?

Sure.

What are you going to DO to make your wish come true?
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • 世间太多瘪犊子
    • View Profile
Quote
The biggest fear of a lot of foreign businesses is the increase of power of beos/dl .They want increase of power for the whole community against big proxies and not another group (which is openly celebrating these changes) which they consider worse than cn-vote.

I didn't get these information from foreign businesses, many businesses seems support these changes.


This is the vote power now, let the data talk:

beos:          70.0M
baozi:         53.3M
B-DEX:        47.5M
CN-VOTE:    237.0M

70+53.3+47.5=171-237=-66

So you can tell us which foreign businesses have this fear about beos?!

The vote power of BEOS is 270M in 2019, now only have 170M bts on beos account, why did they fear BEOS, noe fear CN-VOTE?!

The highest vote power of CN-VOTE is 271M, only have 30M BTS is not leveraged collateral.

Fair vote.



Quote
Also from my knowledge CN-Vote never intended to fork away from bitshares or create a new coin.
This FUD was spread on the bitsharesdac Channel by Digital Lucifer (including new coin) and Abit (own fork) making people belive there will be a free aidrop from a bitshares fork by cn-vote.

These came from the CN-VOTE, and who spread it on the community, you will never know who he is.
When the "Cn-vote's statement on version 4.0 Upgrade came out", that means a fork.

You are not one member of CN-VOTE, and not one member of CN-VOTE once,so don't try to guess the thought of CN-VOTE.

« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 09:45:56 am by binggo »

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Quote
in my view, either the fork happen or not, we need a new version with removing/keeping/updating what abit added, that's why I suggest this Plan C.


Many proxies intended to open BSIP workers after 20th august for each feature on voting system so it could be voted in the regular way.
Staking in current form is something nearly everyone has a problem with (including foreign business owner). However there is big support for DPOS1 also for witness ,Vote decay  and a bit less for collateral removing


The biggest fear of a lot of foreign businesses is the increase of power of beos/dl .They want increase of power for the whole community against big proxies and not another group (which is openly celebrating these changes for their favour) which they consider worse than cn-vote.


Also from my knowledge CN-Vote never intended to fork away from bitshares or create a new coin.
This FUD was spread on the bitsharesdac Channel by Digital Lucifer (including new coin) and Abit (own fork) making people belive there will be a free aidrop from a bitshares fork by cn-vote.
DL who acts now as he is a representative of bitshares openly said that CN-Vote should fork fuck out of bitshares putting a lot of lies about CN-Vote and giving them the responsibility for everything.

When foreigners who normaly critizise CN-Vote for their voting behavior and some blocking start defending cn-vote against the fud from the bitsharesdac channel i guess that says everything.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 09:29:09 am by Thul3 »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
In fact in most condition whether rule A or rule B is not a big deal to me.
What I really concern is the business based on core which make BTS more valuable like gdex\rudex\CNC\magicwallet...
I expected a stable core since years ago, but seems it's still not coming today.

What abit had done is totally not acceptable in my opinion.
But it's already happen. I can accept the changes even some details is not reasonable to me.
The important thing is how to ensure our developer don't do it again.

I don't support fork, it's a disaster to all business based on BTS, what will happen to bitCNY/GDEX.BTC/CNC.. ?
Anybody  will have faith to build business on BTS in the future?
I wish you can resolve disputes, somebody can give a concession,  price will rise, BTS can have a good future.

what abit had done is not acceptable to me either, however I understand why he  do this.

but, it seems in high possibility the fork will happen, not like you, many people in the community think fork is good to BTS, it will lead to free token and price rising.   

I'd like to see the fork can be avoided, but if it really happen, we need to face it.

in my view, either the fork happen or not, we need a new version with removing/keeping/updating what abit added, that's why I suggest this Plan C.

I think this can help BTS to get the faith and reputation back, and also get the senseful voting system evaluation.

Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
In fact in most condition whether rule A or rule B is not a big deal to me.
What I really concern is the business based on core which make BTS more valuable like gdex\rudex\CNC\magicwallet...
I expected a stable core since years ago, but seems it's still not coming today.

What abit had done is totally not acceptable in my opinion.
But it's already happen. I can accept the changes even some details is not reasonable to me.
The important thing is how to ensure our developer don't do it again.

I don't support fork, it's a disaster to all business based on BTS, what will happen to bitCNY/GDEX.BTC/CNC.. ?
Anybody  will have faith to build business on BTS in the future?
I wish you can resolve disputes, somebody can give a concession,  price will rise, BTS can have a good future.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
vote decay          YES
collateral            Not really
DPOS1               YES
Stacking            Never in this form

Way of implementation    Never

possible to vote to tell the community your opinion?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 08:12:32 am by bitcrab »
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Quote
when we can spent the money from the committee-account without the permission of vote, the consensus already gone, just many of us didn't realize it on that time, we all become the trojan already from that moment.

Who started it ?Abit and Bitcrab ?So i follow their next protocol break ?


I disagree that BEOS is the better evil.
Sentiment in foreign community is to go with cn-vote instead of beos.
It's because people are aware of beos history and their voting habbits.


Also a lot of people get back active so its a good time to push for changes based on consensus as i doubt cn-vote will block any good
proposals.Also the voting power is just 240 million BTS of them.
So nobody can claim they are able to block everything when everyone else agrees on something.