there are a lot more than those... Actually, out of the 100 first delegates, a huge number seems disingenuous/dishonest...
All the names/delegates that were present and active during the dry runs, who were people that were making bitshares a vibrant ecosystem have been relegated to rank > 100 and even > 200, while all the first spots have been taken by whoever voted for their +10 delegates. This is a blatant case of "the rich get richer", and these people will certainly not do anything for the network except collecting their fees and sit on it while the rest of us just get disappointed and disgusted...
I have to say that I missed the moment where the votes for a transaction go to *all* the delegates that are approved, I thought that they would be divided between the number of approved delegates in a wallet, or in a round-robin fashion, but in any case I was expecting that the total sum of votes would be 100%. This would mean that a whale could only upvote one of their delegate, or more of them but then the stake would have been divided by the number of voted delegates, which would have prevented the situation we have now.
Pushing it further, I can even see that those people with high stake and their big number of delegates could collude and get, say, all their 80 delegates active, each with 25% approval, and the rest of us can keep our few percents and weep. For me, I was always attracted to bitshares because I imagined a slate of 100 different delegates, each offering something different and contributing to the network either by writing code, promoting bitshares, donating to charities, ... and making the world a better place while still building an efficient and modern financial system. This vision is kinda slipping away right now...
In any case, I think the approval rating of delegates that we have now is flawed, and something needs to be done about it. I don't think the situation as it is now could be fixed, even if people with a huge stake would get involved (invictus?) because I feel this would just lead to a race to the top where most of delegates would all have > 50% and where the difference between delegates would not be significant enough and would not be very stable. Please tell me I'm wrong.
Topic: Disingenuous Delegates Deceit (Read 12399 times)
