Author Topic: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-28)  (Read 4796 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
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.

Online abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4594
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
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
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline btstodamoon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
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 btstodamoon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile

Online abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4594
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
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.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
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 alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
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 ripplexiaoshan

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2300
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: jademont
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 blockchained

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 Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
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 »

Online abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4594
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
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.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
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 Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
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 blockchained



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 Ammar Yousef (ioBanker)

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