ion DELEGATION discussion

[ion.cash]

I see you like to play psychological games.

Crafty slimy weasel.

It won't help you win. Being good at being a weasel doesn't go far in terms of real accomplishments in life. It is destructive behavior and thus you will end up where you deserve.

Not trying to win anything. But anyway...

Get back to work! You have a shit-ton of work to do with your "project"  

No time to slack on arguing with smoothie.

Sticks and stones buddy... Sticks and stones

What kind of lame loser abuses the Trust system to take revenge for humiliating himself in my thread and then suckering me into telling him what an asshole he is for going on and on about how I am not humble just because he is offended that he was outed in my thread for being lazy and illogical.

Your shenanigans won't help you.

All you proved to everyone is how you can waste 24 hours of my scarce time on entire nonsense. And how you can create threads to try to incite animosity such as this one after I said many times I didn't want to discuss the algorithms for what is not yet implemented.

I won't be humiliated as I already offered to publicly apologize if you do create a system that does everything you claimed below

You can stop the nonsense now or you can be humiliated. Apology will be far too late if you leave this day like this.

Come back tomorrow and review your postings and behavior. I posted in the opening post of my thread that I was not going to release details on the consensus algorithm. I have respect for monsterer so when he pressed me for some information, I gave in a little bit.

You come along like a battering ram making silly posts about how delegation always implies trust when in fact that is not the only definition of delegation.

Also I guess you aren't even familiar with the computer science notion of delegation, which is a structural or semantic construct and has nothing to do with trust.

The you have the gall to tell me twice (adding the   the second time) that your illogic is my fault because I didn't put the entire thread in the opening post.

You are so over the top. Now you stoop ever lower abusing the Trust rating system which is supposed to be for bad trades, not for bitch slap arguments in flame wars.

[1714809573]

1714809573

[1714809573]

1714809573

[smoothie]

BTC keeps going sideways and everyone is ripping each other apart - the next rallye is overdue, otherwise there won't be much community left  

edit: sorry for off topic @smoothie, won't happen again

it is cool.

You have any input on the discussion?

[monsterer]

Wow, so this spiralled out of control!

[shitaifan2013]

BTC keeps going sideways and everyone is ripping each other apart - the next rallye is overdue, otherwise there won't be much community left  

edit: sorry for off topic @smoothie, won't happen again

it is cool.

You have any input on the discussion?

well, yes and no.

Unfortunately I'm not tech-sawy enough to comment on anything coding related. But I like and respect all participants of this "discussion" and I'd really like everyone to be the bigger man and  calm down/get some sleep. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way "better" than anyone in here discussing and I have a big enough ego myself. BUT if I can see that this way of discussing isn't leading anywhere, than you smarter guys should see that too 

[monsterer]

Unfortunately yes. I do respect you for stopping the discussion when I requested we stop. Thank you.

To be honest, I just went to bed - it wasn't related to your request... but I'm glad that I did looking at the state of this thread!

[ion.cash]

Unfortunately yes. I do respect you for stopping the discussion when I requested we stop. Thank you.

To be honest, I just went to bed - it wasn't related to your request... but I'm glad that I did looking at the state of this thread!

I have no control nor desire to control if you want to continue to talking about what ever.

I mean thanks for not pushing on accusing me of being willfully abusive in some way. I tried my best to share with you as much info as I could without giving away my design, because my design is not yet implemented. And this is a competitive market place. It has nothing to do with wanting to not discuss. I am confident in the design. I already told you what the caveat is, which is the change in the security model. I see no other holes in the design thus far, and I am pretty deep into it by now.

I would love to share it. I am eager and itching to share it. I am equally afraid of it getting lost if I were killed. I mainly started that thread and reveal some info, hoping to entice another dev to join me, so I can reveal it to someone to get peer review and also to accelerate implementation and to have two or more people holding the design for redundancy. But alas, every time I try to seek out help, it is always a disaster. I lost an entire month of June trying to recruit a co-developer. I think I better just put my head down and do what I did best my entire life before the M.S.. M.S. appears to be in remission the past days.

[illodin]

GO WORK ON YOUR PROJECT AND PLEASE RELEASE IT WHEN YOU ARE DONE. Stop the hype bullshit by posting about it before it is even ready. Makes no sense and is premature in nature (still currently vaporware as smooth called it).

I got the impression the main motivation for starting the thread was to get feedback on the name of the coin, as well as list the features designed so far to start attracting interest of potential developers reading these forums who might want to join the project. Along with establishing a thread whose OP would be updated to contain relevant information arisen in the discussions while keeping the thread readable for new users arriving perhaps months later by deleting back-and-forth after the relevant bits have been moved to the OP.

This should be okay, right? I think his mistake though was to start answering to detailed implementation questions while being unable to reveal the specifics after stating that already in the OP. And your mistake was to insist on asking those detailed implementation questions, and getting angry when not getting them answered.

[ion.cash]

Yup. Those were precisely the committed errors. I should have stuck to my policy in the opening post and I deviated because monsterer had told me long ago that he would help peer review my design when I was ready and so I wanted to be respectful to him. I tried to bend but not break on the design details withholding, but then it ended up inflaming Smoothie the worst (also inflamed monsterer a bit too but we kept it level-headed). I think because Smoothie got caught into some simpleton thinking scenarios and then when I pointed out that he was kind of stumbling into it and needed to really digest the thread in detail, he got offended and started ramping up the "I am not humble". While at the same time, I was rubbing salt into the wounds by making inflammatory claims in r0ach's thread.

So yes mutual culpability for sure. But I am sort of guy that when I can play logic games with people I do, because it is sort of fun for me to watch how people fall into lapses of logic so easily. One of the reasons I have such great respect for smooth is I almost never catch him in one and he sometimes catches me.

Smooth was spot on that I should have refused to discuss the consensus algorithm.

Perhaps I should have made no claims in the opening post about the consensus algorithm, but then I'd basically have nothing to say since I've put the anonymity features on the back burner for the time being.

I will say this that you are all thinking about the delegation the wrong way conceptually. And until I reveal that epiphany it is going to seem like I am a kook.

[smoothie]

GO WORK ON YOUR PROJECT AND PLEASE RELEASE IT WHEN YOU ARE DONE. Stop the hype bullshit by posting about it before it is even ready. Makes no sense and is premature in nature (still currently vaporware as smooth called it).

I got the impression the main motivation for starting the thread was to get feedback on the name of the coin, as well as list the features designed so far to start attracting interest of potential developers reading these forums who might want to join the project. Along with establishing a thread whose OP would be updated to contain relevant information arisen in the discussions while keeping the thread readable for new users arriving perhaps months later by deleting back-and-forth after the relevant bits have been moved to the OP.

This should be okay, right? I think his mistake though was to start answering to detailed implementation questions while being unable to reveal the specifics after stating that already in the OP. And your mistake was to insist on asking those detailed implementation questions, and getting angry when not getting them answered.

At no point was I angry not getting clear answers to my questions.

At this point it seems pointless to continue trying to get answers from someone who has none to share.

[iCEBREAKER]

I am not going to be following the discussion in this thread at this time. Any who continue to make more false and myopic statements, that doesn't mean you are correct.

You realise you sound like John Connor?

You realize you we are intensifying the drama, and thus providing the attention he's seeking?   

[Fuserleer]

...and here was me, looking forward to a mature discussion on delegates. 

It was I that suggested a new thread in the first place!  Fuck ya'll for spoiling it 

[monsterer]

...and here was me, looking forward to a mature discussion on delegates.  

It was I that suggested a new thread in the first place!  Fuck ya'll for spoiling it  

I've a follow up question about the delegates in eMunie, but I'll post in your thread...

[ion.cash]

Can y'all wait maybe 3 months, then let's open a free for all thread on delegation and I will participate openly if my white paper is released.

At this point it seems pointless to continue trying to get answers from someone who has none to share.

Well yeah I only said that like 3 times. You finally get it.

I explain some principles, fungibility, verifiable truth, etc.. I didn't tell you how I remove trust precisely and how I deal with issues such as Sybil and DoS attacks with delegation. That is all I will share at this time. Sorry I wasn't even intending to share what I did. It unintentionally got out of hand.

I did intend to make some strong opinioned statements of principle, that appear in r0aches thread. I don't back them up with details. Yeah disappointing for both of us.   I'd like to tell you. (asap)

If you were a strong programmer and wanted to join and help, then you could see the details sooner.

[TPTB_need_war]

I)  A common complaint of DPoS is that it can't be decentralized because it has the word "delegated" in the title...

Just like when I delegate the transfer of my internet packets to my ISP and all the router hops along the way, thus my participation in the internet is no longer decentralized.  

That is the fabulous logic of Smoothie which he tried to ram down our throat 5 or more times.

As I tried to explain to that young punk several times, if the routers are fungible, replaceable, and can't be monopolized, then the packets find their way to the destination, without need to trust or centralize. Delegation should not be conflated with centralization, nor trust. We told him this 5 or more times, yet he still insisted.

And he claims to be a software developer. I wouldn't let him any where near my code.

By my own profession (software developer)