PTS upgrade poll

[alphaBar]

On the remaining supply question, there are basically 3 positions:

1) Cut the supply at current values.
2) Use remaining supply to pay delegates // developers // for promotion.
3) Use remaining supply to keep virtual mining subsidized.

The most difficult option, but most according to original contract is 3.
The easiest and simplest option is 1, simply stopping the inflation.
The best long term for the PTS DPOS chain itself is probably 2.

PS I just came up with the subsidized mining pool idea and was a little overexcited (read: biased) by it.
Showing the miners finally who knows economy, get promotion via that camp, etc. 

#1 is the best choice - every person gets the same proportion of shares they currently have. No inflation and no giveaways.

#2 would result in an instantaneous inflation (even worse than mining) devaluing all of our shares. This is an insane amount of coins to just create out of thin air and give away. Funds for marketing and promotion has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Typical marketing and promotion funds are a tiny fraction of the amount we're talking about, an in my opinion should be voluntary. I am of the opinion that PTS needs just the basics - good informational resources (ie, a website/client) and a secure and efficient protocol (DPOS). It is up to the DACs to promote and market their coins since they are designed to be for-profit businesses. PTS was created for a different objective.

#3 defies logic for me. We would be paying for miners to secure the networks of other coins and receiving nothing in return.

[Brekyrself]

On the remaining supply question, there are basically 3 positions:

1) Cut the supply at current values.
2) Use remaining supply to pay delegates // developers // for promotion.
3) Use remaining supply to keep virtual mining subsidized.

The most difficult option, but most according to original contract is 3.
The easiest and simplest option is 1, simply stopping the inflation.
The best long term for the PTS DPOS chain itself is probably 2.

PS I just came up with the subsidized mining pool idea and was a little overexcited (read: biased) by it.
Showing the miners finally who knows economy, get promotion via that camp, etc. 

Option 2 sounds most logical.

Pools are quickly dropping support for PTS so something needs to be done or well end up in BTC world with a pool having >51%.  Miner development has come to a standstill also.

[mint chocolate chip]

On the remaining supply question, there are basically 3 positions:

1) Cut the supply at current values.
2) Use remaining supply to pay delegates // developers // for promotion.
3) Use remaining supply to keep virtual mining subsidized.

The most difficult option, but most according to original contract is 3.
The easiest and simplest option is 1, simply stopping the inflation.
The best long term for the PTS DPOS chain itself is probably 2.

PS I just came up with the subsidized mining pool idea and was a little overexcited (read: biased) by it.
Showing the miners finally who knows economy, get promotion via that camp, etc. 

Isn't it an option to disperse the remaining shares to the existing shareholders relative to their current holdings?

[CLains]

On the remaining supply question, there are basically 3 positions:

1) Cut the supply at current values.
2) Use remaining supply to pay delegates // developers // for promotion.
3) Use remaining supply to keep virtual mining subsidized.

The most difficult option, but most according to original contract is 3.
The easiest and simplest option is 1, simply stopping the inflation.
The best long term for the PTS DPOS chain itself is probably 2.

PS I just came up with the subsidized mining pool idea and was a little overexcited (read: biased) by it.
Showing the miners finally who knows economy, get promotion via that camp, etc. 

[Riverhead]

If mining stops are you suggesting the current supply is it and no more coins will be created? I'm not against that idea, just curious if that's what you meant.

[cass]

I don't see the need to continue mining. Miners can mine other currencies and exchange for this one, if that is what they want to hold. This is the same advice that other PoS coins give out.

agreed 

[donkeypong]

I don't see the need to continue mining. Miners can mine other currencies and exchange for this one, if that is what they want to hold. This is the same advice that other PoS coins give out.

[alphaBar]

How about adding another option to the poll:

- Fix difficulty adjustment algorithm immediately using KGW, but start planning for DPOS transition in the future.

The difficulty algorithm can be fixed, but please explain your reasons for delaying the upgrade to DPOS.

[alphaBar]

Mining should continue seamlessly via a subsidized multipool (remaining PTS is given to miners this way).

I'm not seeing the point of keeping a multipool to donate to miners who are no longer performing a service for the network. As shareholders, we are entitled to select the most cost-effective solution for securing our shares. PTS was created with the intent of solving the problem of proof of work, which Dan explicitly described as "overpaying for security". Now that the solution we funded has arrived, are we expected to continue overpaying? And in this case it is worse because we would literally be giving away our money to miners who are busy providing security for competing currencies. Seems totally irrational to me.

[kslavik]

How about adding another option to the poll:

- Fix difficulty adjustment algorithm immediately using KGW, but start planning for DPOS transition in the future.

[donkeypong]

Immediate fix should be immediate.

Other than that I also think a new DPOS chain is good. The argument that PTS should not stand or fall with BitShares X is persuasive, ..

Mining should continue seamlessly via a subsidized multipool (remaining PTS is given to miners this way).

Snapshots should be coordinated to ensure nobody loses their stake. Social consensus must not be broken.

Yes, you said it perfectly.

[CLains]

Immediate fix should be immediate.

Other than that I also think a new DPOS chain is good. The argument that PTS should not stand or fall with BitShares X is persuasive, ..

Mining should continue seamlessly via a subsidized multipool (remaining PTS is given to miners this way).

Snapshots should be coordinated to ensure nobody loses their stake. Social consensus must not be broken.

[Riverhead]

https://github.com/BitShares/BitShares-PTS/releases/tag/v1.0.0

The original protoshares website is down: http://invictus.io/bitshares-pts.php
See the broken link in the sidebar of the subreddit here: http://www.reddit.com/r/protoshare/.
This link (also found in various places) is broken: http://invictus-innovations.com/downloads/

The link you provided (the github repo) is not found anywhere on the Bitshares website - not even on the page that describes Protoshares.

Edit: added broken link

Point taken.  Since PTS still plays a major role in the allocation of future releases from I3 and others using the Bitshares-toolkit it would make sense for it to feature more prominently on the updated public facing sites.  Given the small size of I3's dev team and the releases of late it wouldn't surprise me if this is on the plan.

[kslavik]

PTS was originally created as POW crypto currency, and I think it should remain as such in the future. There is an urgent need to upgrade difficulty algorithm and I'm all for it - KGW should be implemented as soon as possible.

Changes such as DPOS or BitsharesX DAC is kind of a violation of the original contract/promise but are good options for the future when most of the PTS are mined.

[alphaBar]

I want to clarify a few things:

1) Invictus will not be responsible for upgrading PTS. If we do not coordinate to get it done, it will not happen (see Dan's response here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6333.msg84980#msg84980)

2) DPOS is production ready. It is already deployed in BTSX which has 3 times the market cap of PTS.

Yes, it is true that the upgrade will take time to complete. This is further reason to begin the upgrade process IMMEDIATELY. We need to set a future block for the upgrade snapshot. Between now and then, there is minimal development work that needs to be done. Here is what the process should look like:

a. Future block is selected for the upgrade snapshot, let's say 1 month in the future.
b. The exchanges will configure a new DPOS-based PTS client. With regard to exchange functionality, this is essentially a clone of BTSX and should require minimal effort.
c. A few hours before the snapshot the exchanges will halt trading of old-PTS.
d. After the snapshot the exchanges will import the snapshot into the genesis block of the new-PTS and resume trading. Old-PTS will no  longer be supported by any exchange.

If the community agrees to migrate to a new DPOS blockchain, there is literally no reason (technical or otherwise) to delay the move. Aside from saying "it is hard", I would love to hear exactly (1) what is hard about it and (2) how waiting would alleviate that difficulty.