Author Topic: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)  (Read 2177 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4511
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)
« on: September 16, 2020, 12:48:41 am »
The plan is to activate BitShares 5.0 on 2020-09-30.

The key feature in BitShares 5.0 is Automated Market making (AMM) aka liquidity pooling & mining. Code is here: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2260

All changes: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/milestone/31

Poll workers for the changes:

1.14.289 - "Poll---AMM Featured BTS 5.0 Update---Yes"
1.14.290 - "Poll---AMM Featured BTS 5.0 Update---NO"

Please vote.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 03:11:11 am by abit »
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline blockchained

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2020, 11:19:42 am »
The plan is to activate BitShares 5.0 on 2020-09-30.

The key feature in BitShares 5.0 is Automated Market making (AMM) aka liquidity pooling & mining. Code is here: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2260

All changes: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/milestone/31

dude you went against consensus and brought trojan in previous release, as a top witness I will not support any code from you
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 11:41:38 am by blockchained »

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
  • 世间太多瘪犊子
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2020, 12:19:11 pm »
Support!

Code is there.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 12:25:00 pm by binggo »

Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2020, 12:30:26 pm »
AMM is a strong addition - can we see an overview of how it will work? (I.e. is it deployed on testnet or anything?)

Can we get an overview of each of the changes and why they are proposed? List copied below for clarity.

Release Notes: BitShares Core 5.0.0

Add extended history tracking for select accounts.
Extended operation history for accounts selected by ID or by registrar
Implement Automated Market Maker (AMM) aka Liquidity Pool
Implement liquidity pool
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets
Remove liquid vp

 



Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2020, 12:33:00 pm »
Quote
The plan is to activate BitShares 5.0 on 2020-09-30.

Who's plan ?

Please point witnesses the BSIP's which have been voted in so they can follow protocol based on DPOS which bitshares is.

Also the last dicussions about these changes and what exectly will change and what it will enable like someone asked on github.

Where were discussions about changing voting power and where did they get approved so i can read about it myself ?

Who made the audit ?

The same person who put the last trojan into mainnet 4.0 ?Bitshares now a one men show where community doesn't need to participate anymore  ?

Another group already preparing to fork away should your madness and ignorance of their demand not stop where everyone else tried to not let a serious fork happen.

Quote
Can we get an overview of each of the changes and why they are proposed?
They are not proposed.Proposals can be refused or modified.They are enforced in full against any protocol or community participation where majority doesn't even understand the changes which will be implemented because of lack of any explanation or discussion.


Some points are not even 24h old on github with open questions by participants which are not answered.

This whole upgrade is a joke.

Sorry i won't support a one men show who went nuts not answering a single question on github or letting other peoples opinion be included.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 01:24:03 pm by Thul3 »

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2020, 05:54:25 pm »
Does i understood correctly that abit decided himself now to implement that all BTS even non collateral will lose all voting power and only stacked BTS will have voting power ?


I guess it can't be more stupid to punish active traders on bitshares.

Seems like abit joined hardcore socialism where he knows best what others want as they are to dumb to vote correctly like in good old east block.


Maybe we should rebrand bitshares to abitshares?
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 06:27:59 pm by Thul3 »

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4511
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2020, 06:24:39 pm »
AMM is a strong addition - can we see an overview of how it will work? (I.e. is it deployed on testnet or anything?)

Can we get an overview of each of the changes and why they are proposed? List copied below for clarity.

Release Notes: BitShares Core 5.0.0

Add extended history tracking for select accounts.
Extended operation history for accounts selected by ID or by registrar
Implement Automated Market Maker (AMM) aka Liquidity Pool
Implement liquidity pool
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets
Remove liquid vp
Not only these. As of writing there are 59 closed issues and merged pull requests in the same milestone: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/milestone/31?closed=1 .
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2020, 06:39:52 pm »
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets #2262
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2262

New BSIP or BSIP24 discussion: stake lock-up mechanism, count only real "locked" stake as voting stake #83
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/83


Maybe someone explains Abit that BTS is not Steem and that BTS is core token of our ecosystem .

So somebody who is inactive and stacking BTS has in his eyes more value in governance than somebody who is activly using bitshares ecosystem and knows the ins and outs and creates income for bitshares.
The active member having completly no say as he is using BTS in the ecosystem which is the main purpose of BTS.

Maybe Abit can explain to us how somebody who stacks only participates in bitshares growth and i'm not talking about price.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 06:46:51 pm by Thul3 »

Offline Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2020, 07:06:27 pm »
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets #2262
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2262

New BSIP or BSIP24 discussion: stake lock-up mechanism, count only real "locked" stake as voting stake #83
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/83


Maybe someone explains Abit that BTS is not Steem and that BTS is core token of our ecosystem .

So somebody who is inactive and stacking BTS has in his eyes more value in governance than somebody who is activly using bitshares ecosystem and knows the ins and outs and creates income for bitshares.
The active member having completly no say as he is using BTS in the ecosystem which is the main purpose of BTS.

Maybe Abit can explain to us how somebody who stacks only participates in bitshares growth and i'm not talking about price.

Voting is used for governance purposes; governance is used for stabilizing the blockchain, it's infrastructure and development; you are not an infrastructure expert nor a developer; you don't need to be here by the way; you are claiming your self as a market expert; I doubt that too, kindly stay in market making and show us what can you do for BitShares instead of insulting the only last active core developer on this blockchain.

For those who cannot read codes nor understand development should never get involved in voting, when it comes to the changes that is proposed here; this will raise the value of BTS because BTS will be locked and any leading role in development further would require sacrificing BTS in locks; if development is failing for these voters; the future value of their BTS when it's unlocked is enough punishment for them.
Be part of the change and set bitshares-vision as your proxy!
Committee account: iobanker-core
Ammar Yousef - CEO @ ioBanker OÜ

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2020, 08:04:32 pm »
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets #2262
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2262

New BSIP or BSIP24 discussion: stake lock-up mechanism, count only real "locked" stake as voting stake #83
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/83


Maybe someone explains Abit that BTS is not Steem and that BTS is core token of our ecosystem .

So somebody who is inactive and stacking BTS has in his eyes more value in governance than somebody who is activly using bitshares ecosystem and knows the ins and outs and creates income for bitshares.
The active member having completly no say as he is using BTS in the ecosystem which is the main purpose of BTS.

Maybe Abit can explain to us how somebody who stacks only participates in bitshares growth and i'm not talking about price.


Comments from that BSIP in github

TheTaconator DEV
Quote
My main concern with the proposition is for the stake in collateral. It seems unfair to those holders to limit their influence on voting especially due to the value that their collateral brings to the ecosystem.

startailcoon UI DEV

Quote
BTS locked in collateral could be counted as locked assets. Even if it could be liquidised its also a risky business while making good volume for the bitAsset as well. It could be considered a good thing that the asset is used, and thus should be counted.

Open orders aren't locked, since they are for sale, and shouldn't be counted.

xeroc DEV

Quote
Collateral: I would argue this should be voting because it is not quickly liquidated in case the BTS valuation goes down. Also, people have been asked to go short if they really want to support the system and we would take away their voting right now. Doesn't feel right.

Quote
If we were to require a powerup to enable governance features I see the following major issues:
This changes the previous deal which has potentially been used by investors to decide to buy in. Given that BTS is much more decentralized than STEEM (there is no 'steemit inc.') this might open up the possibility for class action suites against a) the proxies who approved that change, and b) the witnesses who applied the change.

Schiessl UI DEV

Quote
Just FYI: Removing liquid BTS from voting power will strip ref UI users of their voting since you can only stake BTS with CLI.

blckchained gateway DEV

Quote
dude you went against consensus and brought trojan in previous release, as a top witness I will not support any code from you


Litepresence DEV and honest asset

Quote
The world is full of good locksmiths: some of them are unethical thieves


R DEV and security tester

Quote
Degrades BTS Utility

I could continue with the statements of honest DEV's on bitshares.

You Ammar belong to a red socket dev caste who thinks like socialist leaders who have nothing and want to control everything claiming that folk can't handle wise decissions.
That's the exect same explanation of eastern communism why they had planned econemy.
Btw you red socket proofed already on iobanker that you totaly failed.I told you a year before that noone nuts enough is going to follow an unethical dev with poor trading fundamentals and law knowledge who proofs himself untrustworthy each time on telegram.
Did something changed after a year of your spamming and garbage claims ?I guess not ?How much debt has your token now after such a long time ?Like $2K in total which you call a great success?
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 08:21:33 pm by Thul3 »

Offline blockchained

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2020, 08:13:36 pm »
insulting the only last active core developer on this blockchain

LoL this kind of developers as abit must be kicked out from the job as fast as possible

But I'm not surprised why you are supporting broke of the consensus and abit scam



When I look to your company I laughed hard:

https://www.e-krediidiinfo.ee/14386003-IOBANKER%20O%C3%9C

you have nice office in the middle of the forest, very "trustworthy"

Männimäe, Pudisoo küla Kuusalu vald Harju maakond 74626

did you google yourself where you registered? Take it easy I made some screenshots for you





with such "office" no surprise why you support fraud =)

I had a couple of companies in Estonia lived there for a while and when I saw the place of your company registration I laugh out loud, just FYI if it not Tallinn or Tartu 9 from 10 it is a scam, and then I google it and found your office in the middle of nowhere)))
« Last Edit: September 16, 2020, 08:33:24 pm by blockchained »

Offline Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2020, 11:51:30 pm »
Remove voting power from liquid BTS and tickets #2262
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/2262

New BSIP or BSIP24 discussion: stake lock-up mechanism, count only real "locked" stake as voting stake #83
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/83


Maybe someone explains Abit that BTS is not Steem and that BTS is core token of our ecosystem .

So somebody who is inactive and stacking BTS has in his eyes more value in governance than somebody who is activly using bitshares ecosystem and knows the ins and outs and creates income for bitshares.
The active member having completly no say as he is using BTS in the ecosystem which is the main purpose of BTS.

Maybe Abit can explain to us how somebody who stacks only participates in bitshares growth and i'm not talking about price.


Comments from that BSIP in github

TheTaconator DEV
Quote
My main concern with the proposition is for the stake in collateral. It seems unfair to those holders to limit their influence on voting especially due to the value that their collateral brings to the ecosystem.

startailcoon UI DEV

Quote
BTS locked in collateral could be counted as locked assets. Even if it could be liquidised its also a risky business while making good volume for the bitAsset as well. It could be considered a good thing that the asset is used, and thus should be counted.

Open orders aren't locked, since they are for sale, and shouldn't be counted.

xeroc DEV

Quote
Collateral: I would argue this should be voting because it is not quickly liquidated in case the BTS valuation goes down. Also, people have been asked to go short if they really want to support the system and we would take away their voting right now. Doesn't feel right.

Quote
If we were to require a powerup to enable governance features I see the following major issues:
This changes the previous deal which has potentially been used by investors to decide to buy in. Given that BTS is much more decentralized than STEEM (there is no 'steemit inc.') this might open up the possibility for class action suites against a) the proxies who approved that change, and b) the witnesses who applied the change.

Schiessl UI DEV

Quote
Just FYI: Removing liquid BTS from voting power will strip ref UI users of their voting since you can only stake BTS with CLI.

blckchained gateway DEV

Quote
dude you went against consensus and brought trojan in previous release, as a top witness I will not support any code from you


Litepresence DEV and honest asset

Quote
The world is full of good locksmiths: some of them are unethical thieves


R DEV and security tester

Quote
Degrades BTS Utility

I could continue with the statements of honest DEV's on bitshares.

You Ammar belong to a red socket dev caste who thinks like socialist leaders who have nothing and want to control everything claiming that folk can't handle wise decissions.
That's the exect same explanation of eastern communism why they had planned econemy.
Btw you red socket proofed already on iobanker that you totaly failed.I told you a year before that noone nuts enough is going to follow an unethical dev with poor trading fundamentals and law knowledge who proofs himself untrustworthy each time on telegram.
Did something changed after a year of your spamming and garbage claims ?I guess not ?How much debt has your token now after such a long time ?Like $2K in total which you call a great success?

I am what I am; you are what you are; people around knows; you radical racist; here is BitShares, the Blockchain of diversity; a worldwide organization; built and controlled by the intelligent race; and guess what? you are not one of us and cannot control us with your fiats; we will break your fiats down like a fly; expect us.
Be part of the change and set bitshares-vision as your proxy!
Committee account: iobanker-core
Ammar Yousef - CEO @ ioBanker OÜ

Offline Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2020, 12:12:18 am »
insulting the only last active core developer on this blockchain

LoL this kind of developers as abit must be kicked out from the job as fast as possible

But I'm not surprised why you are supporting broke of the consensus and abit scam



When I look to your company I laughed hard:

https://www.e-krediidiinfo.ee/14386003-IOBANKER%20O%C3%9C

you have nice office in the middle of the forest, very "trustworthy"

Männimäe, Pudisoo küla Kuusalu vald Harju maakond 74626

did you google yourself where you registered? Take it easy I made some screenshots for you





with such "office" no surprise why you support fraud =)

I had a couple of companies in Estonia lived there for a while and when I saw the place of your company registration I laugh out loud, just FYI if it not Tallinn or Tartu 9 from 10 it is a scam, and then I google it and found your office in the middle of nowhere)))

When you don't find anything wrong with me; you will make it.

The Estonian government is controlled by an intelligent race; your kind wouldn't understand.

First of all you need classes in using Google of course; this is the official Estonian government Centre of Registers and Information Systems: https://ariregister.rik.ee go and type iobanker and hit enter to see our address; government wouldn't register us without proofing we exist there; why don't you come and give a visit? or be brave enough to write your RuDex underground address here so perhaps intelligent race would give you a visit and teach you Google :)

I'm aware that your kind wouldn't be happy when they see our work here: https://e-estonia.com/why-is-estonia-a-startup-paradise/

"TIME WILL TELL".
Be part of the change and set bitshares-vision as your proxy!
Committee account: iobanker-core
Ammar Yousef - CEO @ ioBanker OÜ

Offline blockchained

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #13 on: September 17, 2020, 12:32:39 am »


When you don't find anything wrong with me; you will make it.

Hey banker from the barn everything wrong with you,



your address is a shithole, as I stated above

https://www.e-krediidiinfo.ee/14386003-IOBANKER%20O%C3%9C
https://www.inforegister.ee/14386003-IOBANKER-OU
https://www.teatmik.ee/en/personlegal/14386003-ioBanker-O%C3%9C
https://krediidiraportid.ee/iobanker-ou


 why don't you come and give a visit?


I'm not interested in countrysides and fake offices from a fraud supporter

Quote from: Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)
I am what I am;
perhaps intelligent race would give you a visit
Go paint your barn, fake banker maybe somebody notice it and invite you to paint their fence, and you make some money finally, painting fences is a good niche for your "intelligent" race. Because as liquidity provider you suck.

« Last Edit: September 17, 2020, 01:22:29 am by blockchained »

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2020, 05:48:36 am »
Quote
Voting is used for governance purposes; governance is used for stabilizing the blockchain, it's infrastructure and development;

Is it?Or is it being used to safe your income no matter what you offer?





Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #15 on: September 17, 2020, 05:54:23 am »
Completely support the introduction of AMM tools and them being pushed through.

The other change removing voting from liquid BTS is a huge and fundamental change to the functioning of BTS and should not be introduced without consensus. The previous change with stake multiplier already gives an (excessive in my view) increase in voting strength to stakers.

The removal of voting for collateral was a special case as far as I'm concerned - it was giving disproportionate voting power to a group that had every reason to corrupt the system during bear markets.

Similarly voter decay eliminated impact from dead / inactive accounts.

So yeah I support introduction of the AMM measures (which would be a great and necessary addition) but stop changing the voting rules without consensus - also please be upfront and honest about what you are proposing.

You can't say 'the big one is AMM' and just ignore another massive fundamental change to how voting works - it's disingenuous and pointless, as you know that as soon as people start reading and digging a bit they will see and understand it.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2020, 06:11:24 am by matle85 »

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4511
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #16 on: September 18, 2020, 04:02:03 am »
The other change removing voting from liquid BTS is a huge and fundamental change to the functioning of BTS and should not be introduced without consensus. The previous change with stake multiplier already gives an (excessive in my view) increase in voting strength to stakers.

The removal of voting for collateral was a special case as far as I'm concerned - it was giving disproportionate voting power to a group that had every reason to corrupt the system during bear markets.
The new changes in 5.0 are necessary too. It's rolled out because the previous changes are insufficient for protecting the platform since corruption evolved.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #17 on: September 18, 2020, 07:11:35 am »
The other change removing voting from liquid BTS is a huge and fundamental change to the functioning of BTS and should not be introduced without consensus. The previous change with stake multiplier already gives an (excessive in my view) increase in voting strength to stakers.

The removal of voting for collateral was a special case as far as I'm concerned - it was giving disproportionate voting power to a group that had every reason to corrupt the system during bear markets.
The new changes in 5.0 are necessary too. It's rolled out because the previous changes are insufficient for protecting the platform since corruption evolved.

Could you please point which corruption exectly ?
Because in my opinion it is about that cn-vote and alt increased their voting power which you didn't expected.

Also claiming it is because of corruption i guess there is no bigger corruption on bitshares than what you have done so many times in the past and even you openly admited in telegram groups you have no problem with it as long as it fits your point of view.

Who created the biggest lies on bitshares and got #1 fudder together with DL ?

Didin't you fudded that cn-vote would fork out all over bitshares when there was no intention to fork at all ?
Later when being asked by others you and DL changed your tactics blaming cn-vote ?

Did you and DL demanded others to spread fud that cn-vote tries a hostile takeover even their actions have majority of votes and your actions nearly none and informing cexes with this kind of BS story so they block cn-vote ?

The list goes on and on how much lies and fud you spread.

Now you guys even lie to witnesses that they won't have any liability if they chose your update to change completly the voting system without any community consent.


I recommend witnesses to check law for terms like habits,practice or custom (lat usus).
Bitshares practice was till today always to update bitshares based on DPOS consensus and nothing else.
Thats a year long practice and under law something like that is being considered a standard or unwritten term.

If they claim you won't be liable thats a blatant lie.
At least know what real consequences you can get as anybody holding bts would be eligible to open a case.
Ignorance does not protect one from punishment


Quote
BitShares core recently gave some sneak-peak info about BitShares core 5.0 release, via the community Telegram. Rapid progression is occurring since the recent consensus fixes in BitShares 4.0 happened earlier in July.
Could you please point who exectly is bitshares core and by what consensus ?
Also who decides about the points added in the rapid progression ?Where are the discussions ?
Because your next innovation to add more taxation again seems to be somehow poor.





There are way better devs with real innovations and ethics waiting to get active which are being blocked for ages by the same caste who made majority of members already leave bitshares over the last years thanks to their poor inovation they enforced to everyone each time without consensus or breaking it.

The same people from
OMO fund till (excessive margin wall leading nearly to GS by breaking consensus from CR 3 to CR 1.86,buying own margin call to not lose 10% on MSSR)
BSIP42 (on BitUSD enforced without consensus and against clear community will even with promise to not touch bitUSD which leaded to GS,bitcny saved due to GS protection but still big part of community gone)
BSIP76 (promise to be temp which they didn't cared anymore till today)
BAIP scam instead of normal worker.    (Getting funds indirectly for GDEX by creating BAIP instead of normal worker to take funds from committee as they could get no funds from reserve pool)
Trojan (This is a major issue which i can't understand how some people can support it.For a DeFi its a disaster on reputation and trust.)
scam workers and exchanges (supporting knowingly workers for scam exchanges for benefit or approving scam exchanges for bounty)
Fork Fudders (notorious liars and fudders pushing cn-vote to fork out even cn-vote had no intention in doing so but to restore voting system and vote in DPOS1,vote decay,collateral 50/50 in regular way with no stacking.

How many members have we already lost thanks to them ?


A major point which people totaly forgat is TRUST.
Without TRUST no succees.
And all i can say is majority lost trust which you could see before on the decline trading on GDEX assets
and increasing by even Abits supporters dumping their BTS.
Abit ,DL and co leaving bitsharesdex channel because of massive amounts of frustrated members calling them scammers even before the trojan.Abit even implementing his bot to mute or ban all people who openly criticize his actions.

Does majority of community trust abit and co ?
Or is it a minority?
The minority going to replace the liquidity from the majority ?

« Last Edit: September 18, 2020, 10:47:54 am by Thul3 »

Offline blockchained

Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #18 on: September 19, 2020, 04:19:18 pm »
The new changes in 5.0 are necessary too. It's rolled out because the previous changes are insufficient for protecting the platform since corruption evolved.

Dude corruption it is your second name

Offline ripplexiaoshan

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2299
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: jademont
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #19 on: September 19, 2020, 04:53:03 pm »
I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.
BTS committee member:jademont

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #20 on: September 23, 2020, 02:53:48 am »
remove the voting power of liquility BTS is a big change, but it's reasonable and acceptable to me, so I will support it.
but we'd best keep enough time for the transition period to prevent abuse of voting power.

I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2020, 03:02:12 am »
BTW, the operation of lock BTS is a good feature,
we should give more rights to the locked shares, for example airdrop the fees income to them.
and  I encourage vote for the witness who have locked more BTS first.

remove the voting power of liquility BTS is a big change, but it's reasonable and acceptable to me, so I will support it.
but we'd best keep enough time for the transition period to prevent abuse of voting power.

I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4511
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« Reply #22 on: September 23, 2020, 10:53:05 am »
remove the voting power of liquility BTS is a big change, but it's reasonable and acceptable to me, so I will support it.
but we'd best keep enough time for the transition period to prevent abuse of voting power.

I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.
Actions speak louder than words.

BTW, the operation of lock BTS is a good feature,
we should give more rights to the locked shares, for example airdrop the fees income to them.

My opinion is exactly the opposite. IMHO airdropping attracts more irresponsible behaviors.

Quote
and  I encourage vote for the witness who have locked more BTS first.
IMHO this is OK but not necessary.
We need more people / capital to join us building the ecosystem but not only simply holding while doing nothing.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline btstodamoon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)
« Reply #23 on: September 23, 2020, 12:52:44 pm »
支持abit

Offline btstodamoon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2020, 12:55:37 pm »
拐着弯骂猴哥,就是你的不对了,不过见证人需要锁仓,如果就是挖了卖搞钱,要他干嘛?

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4511
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2020, 07:17:44 pm »
拐着弯骂猴哥,就是你的不对了,不过见证人需要锁仓,如果就是挖了卖搞钱,要他干嘛?
少給他挖点就行了
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)
« Reply #26 on: September 25, 2020, 08:36:19 pm »
For transparency:

After looking at the relevant poll (and its unfortunate lack of participation despite the extremely important subject) and the voting advantage of the yes supporters, I decided I will run the new BitShares Core 5.0.0 release.

Stakeholders that do not agree can manage their vote accordingly.