[ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network

[EmilioMann]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

No one governance system is totally perfect.
Be it state, company or entity governance.
There will always be someone dissatisfied.
And we also shouldn't mix things up.
The governance of a state is very different from the governance of a company or entity.
A system that looks good on one may look terrible on another.
At Decred, who has most skin in the game has the most voting power and not necessarily the majority.
And this is very good in a company or entity, as we know that most people are dumb while those who have the most to lose will think hard about decisions.
In any case, Decred's hybrid mining system, where POS confirms the POW blocks, was designed to make a hardfork like ETH and bitcoin impossible without community consensus.
If POW miners attempt a hardfork without consensus, ticket owners will decline and it will not happen and vice versa.
A hardfork in decred only happens if there is consensus between POW miners and ticket owners (POS).

https://blog.decred.org/2018/10/15/Politeia-in-Production/

how many transactions per second has Decred?

I don't know now but with the lightning network will be hundreds of thousands.

[1714188232]

1714188232

[gembitz]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

checks richlist ====> insider controlled shitcoin * checK!!* :\ what does this coin BUY?? ~ nothing legit i'm aware of.. :\ grrr i call bullshit!!===>tl;dr= it was a phishing scam.

[EmilioMann]

Decred Assembly - Decentralizing the Treasury


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N8Fq1tU3XM&feature=youtu.be

[gembitz]

Decred Assembly - Decentralizing the Treasury


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N8Fq1tU3XM&feature=youtu.be

looks like criminals, talks like criminals..it's a geeses. :\ hmm what was the point of a "airdrop" anyways?

[Kriptobt1]

Decred Journal has released the latest update on the project for the month of August, this is the largest publication, we have laid out all the links, blogs, information, approval and the beginning of work on the development of DEX

https://medium.com/decred/decred-journal-august-2019-43626ee68ff

[fredine]

looks like criminals, talks like criminals..it's a geeses. :\ hmm what was the point of a "airdrop" anyways?

People like yourself with pea-sized brain will never understand the point of a "airdrop". 

[Cimmy_revenger]

Decred Journal has released the latest update on the project for the month of August, this is the largest publication, we have laid out all the links, blogs, information, approval and the beginning of work on the development of DEX

https://medium.com/decred/decred-journal-august-2019-43626ee68ff

This is good news or not for pump DCR we don't know , but if we check history DCR pair BTC always go down more 1 years.
Maybe this time we Will buy back again DCR.

[artdor]

For a long time I did not follow my favorite project. How are you? Any interesting news? What to expect this fall? I remember there were times when Decred grew by leaps and bounds)

[Wind_FURY]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

At Decred, who has most skin in the game has the most voting power and not necessarily the majority.

And this is very good in a company or entity, as we know that most people are dumb while those who have the most to lose will think hard about decisions.

That's part of my point. If Decred was like Bitcoin, it would then be possible for a scenario which the richest merchants, miners/NYA, which was the minority, "won", and got their 2X fork.

In any case, Decred's hybrid mining system, where POS confirms the POW blocks, was designed to make a hardfork like ETH and bitcoin impossible without community consensus.

If POW miners attempt a hardfork without consensus, ticket owners will decline and it will not happen and vice versa.

A hardfork in decred only happens if there is consensus between POW miners and ticket owners (POS).

https://blog.decred.org/2018/10/15/Politeia-in-Production/

I'm asking about a contentious hard fork, that deliberately splits the chain.

[Gash]

Hahaha. I already added him in my ignore list. But why is he so resolute on trolling Decred of all cryptocurrencies? Is there a historical lesson I should learn about this person?

He is trolling around since he missed to register his airdrop - just put him on ignore. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1290358.msg18421713#msg18421713

i registered and was "accepted" ..now wheres my fucking coins? :\  (((we never forget >>>we never forgive)))

YOU didn't submit an address for them to send the DCR! No shit you didn't get coins.
Go derp around elsewhere, you don't even legs to stand on here  

yes i got the acceptance email and everything..

then these turkeys tried to dox me!! whereas everyone in crypto knows me already~we had a coin on bittrex BEFORE DCR was ever listed!!!

through this process i've found others who have been DEFRAUDED by this decred / bittrex cartel, so it's not a isolated incident.

 Have fun waiting for the S.E.C. to shut you down for good. ...pit of snakes you are.

I have included your name in the book of glory, a famous scripture lying on a pedestal of grace in the hall of nobility. I have always known that u be a prolific male. Now is your turn to prove that to me. Go to the cabin where I keep your bovine wife and beget a young pedigree of sons and daughters of fuck. Dalliance with an oxen is a paradigmatic experience that is to take u to a new level of being, open your eyelids and let the lights of adams garden to impregnate your eyes.

[EmilioMann]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

At Decred, who has most skin in the game has the most voting power and not necessarily the majority.

And this is very good in a company or entity, as we know that most people are dumb while those who have the most to lose will think hard about decisions.

That's part of my point. If Decred was like Bitcoin, it would then be possible for a scenario which the richest merchants, miners/NYA, which was the minority, "won", and got their 2X fork.

In any case, Decred's hybrid mining system, where POS confirms the POW blocks, was designed to make a hardfork like ETH and bitcoin impossible without community consensus.

If POW miners attempt a hardfork without consensus, ticket owners will decline and it will not happen and vice versa.

A hardfork in decred only happens if there is consensus between POW miners and ticket owners (POS).

https://blog.decred.org/2018/10/15/Politeia-in-Production/

I'm asking about a contentious hard fork, that deliberately splits the chain.

In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

[Tarz]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

At Decred, who has most skin in the game has the most voting power and not necessarily the majority.

And this is very good in a company or entity, as we know that most people are dumb while those who have the most to lose will think hard about decisions.

That's part of my point. If Decred was like Bitcoin, it would then be possible for a scenario which the richest merchants, miners/NYA, which was the minority, "won", and got their 2X fork.

In any case, Decred's hybrid mining system, where POS confirms the POW blocks, was designed to make a hardfork like ETH and bitcoin impossible without community consensus.

If POW miners attempt a hardfork without consensus, ticket owners will decline and it will not happen and vice versa.

A hardfork in decred only happens if there is consensus between POW miners and ticket owners (POS).

https://blog.decred.org/2018/10/15/Politeia-in-Production/

I'm asking about a contentious hard fork, that deliberately splits the chain.

In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

This is why decred's governance is immensely ahead of other cryptos. Shit's not condoned here. And this is the main advantage of Decred over severely manipulated coins such as ETH, BTS and now BEOS and other DPOS coins. And when u take a closer look at the top 30 in the CMC, it buffles me so much that nobody has yet realized the potential benefits Decred has that can be used to refactor and enhance crypto economy.

[jwinterm]

...
In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

This is misleading, imo. If there's a contentious hardfork, the losing party can modify the codebase to allow their chain to continue. They're going to hardfork anyway. There's no magic protection against people making a one off or permanent change to the rules of the system to allow their form to live.

[gembitz]

A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.

Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?

At Decred, who has most skin in the game has the most voting power and not necessarily the majority.

And this is very good in a company or entity, as we know that most people are dumb while those who have the most to lose will think hard about decisions.

That's part of my point. If Decred was like Bitcoin, it would then be possible for a scenario which the richest merchants, miners/NYA, which was the minority, "won", and got their 2X fork.

In any case, Decred's hybrid mining system, where POS confirms the POW blocks, was designed to make a hardfork like ETH and bitcoin impossible without community consensus.

If POW miners attempt a hardfork without consensus, ticket owners will decline and it will not happen and vice versa.

A hardfork in decred only happens if there is consensus between POW miners and ticket owners (POS).

https://blog.decred.org/2018/10/15/Politeia-in-Production/

I'm asking about a contentious hard fork, that deliberately splits the chain.

In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

devs control EVERYTHING right?    ~not centralized at all? hmm Lol!!

[EmilioMann]

No, the hardfork voting system is fully automatic and without human interference.
The devs are working to all be done automatically in Decred soon 

[EmilioMann]

Nothing will be released without being 100% secure.
ETH DAO served to show some flaws
For now it still takes some people to push some buttons

[Wind_FURY]

...
In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

This is misleading, imo. If there's a contentious hardfork, the losing party can modify the codebase to allow their chain to continue. They're going to hardfork anyway. There's no magic protection against people making a one off or permanent change to the rules of the system to allow their form to live.

That's my point. There's nothing that can stop a determined minority from splitting away from the main chain. But with Decred, it might be the true community majority made up of small HODLERS who delegate their votes to pools.

[jwinterm]

...
In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

This is misleading, imo. If there's a contentious hardfork, the losing party can modify the codebase to allow their chain to continue. They're going to hardfork anyway. There's no magic protection against people making a one off or permanent change to the rules of the system to allow their form to live.

That's my point. There's nothing that can stop a determined minority from splitting away from the main chain. But with Decred, it might be the true community majority made up of small HODLERS who delegate their votes to pools.

With Decred it could be the devs and placeholder capital forcing through any change they want, and the more Decred poor 99.999% forking off as well.

[gembitz]

No, the hardfork voting system is fully automatic and without human interference.
The devs are working to all be done automatically in Decred soon 

aka "SKYNET" *the very moment it's done automatically the real serious hacking begins!!weeeeeeee
===> #EXPECT_BITCOINERZZZ #OCCUPY_CRYPTO

...
In case of a hard fork voting, the decred code does not allow the existence of 2 blockchains. The "defeated" blockchain "dies".
Hard fork happens automatically and takes everyone in the same direction.
It is impossible for a group to continue on the old blockchain and keep it alive.
It's impossible to happen at Decred what happened to ETH and BTC.
The devs took great care in developing this.
It is one of the main differentials of decred.

This is misleading, imo. If there's a contentious hardfork, the losing party can modify the codebase to allow their chain to continue. They're going to hardfork anyway. There's no magic protection against people making a one off or permanent change to the rules of the system to allow their form to live.

That's my point. There's nothing that can stop a determined minority from splitting away from the main chain. But with Decred, it might be the true community majority made up of small HODLERS who delegate their votes to pools.

With Decred it could be the devs and placeholder capital forcing through any change they want, and the more Decred poor 99.999% forking off as well.

the premine is held tightly by a handful of dev-insiders and bittrex exchange cartel...there is no community :-D pfft

[jwinterm]

I don't know about bittrex, but with the premine compounded by staking and from what I understand placeholder made a very large investment (now compounded by staking), I'd guess they would be close to being able to push votes through. I'm not saying the system is broken, I'm just not sure this is the best way to do governance on chain (if there is a best way).