NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[pandaisftw]

For some people it's not a problem to create 100 000 accounts just for voting. Also I hate the idea 1 person - 1 vote.

I was thinking of doing something like that:
1 Nxt - 1 Vote
100 Nxt - 100 Votes
1000 Nxt - 800 Votes
10 000 Nxt -7000 Votes
100 000 Nxt - 60 000 Votes
1 000 000 Nxt - 500 000 Votes
5 000 000 Nxt - 4 000 000 Votes
10 000 000 Nxt - 6 000 000 Votes

The same problem still exists, except now people will split their stash into holdings of 100 NXT each to get an advantage over those who don't. Eventually everyone will have to do so if they want their voice to be equal.

In terms of voting, I appreciate what you're trying to do with a 1 person == 1 vote, but... well... it just won't work.

It really has to be Proof of Stake: 1 NXT == 1 Vote.  Any other system WILL be gamed, and will not represent the collective interest of the NXT community.

Think of it like a stockholder voting in a typical corporation.  You own one share, you get one vote.  Except here, NXT is your stock.

Perhaps a proxy voting system could be implemented to help smaller stakeholders pool their collective votes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_voting.

I bet a bunch of smaller stakeholders banded together would be a formidable block.

I agree, in PoS the only guarantee of identity is the coins themselves. So any system to equalize the power between large holders vs. small holders has to be based on this concept. Any type of weird log scaling or per account voting will in fact cause those with large holdings to gain an unequal advantage over smaller holdings (as I mentioned before, a large holder can afford more transactions fees to send NXT to a large number of accounts. A small holder cannot.)

In terms of voting, I appreciate what you're trying to do with a 1 person == 1 vote, but... well... it just won't work.

I think it could but it does require a bit of "thinking outside of the box" - I could envision some sort of decentralised online *game* which you have to play in order to vote (you only get to vote when you finish the game).

If you limit the time window (and make the game something that might take an hour or so to complete) then I think you'd get close to 1 vote per person (you'll never get it 100% right).

It's really a question of whether a "democracy" is what is wanted or whether instead it should just be the largest stakeholders that make the decisions.

Maybe a better way is to simply *pay* for a vote - so if you want to vote 10K times it costs you 10K NXT (with the funds being used on whatever is being voted for I guess).

Yes, a solution that is not vulnerable to a large holder simply dividing his stake up (this means scaling and per-account voting are out) would be ideal. However, one issue I can see with the "game" method is that you can have a bunch of people with a lot of time on their hands given disproportionately large voting power. People who are busy, like the people developing clients, exchanges, services, etc. won't have as much time to play the game, thus have less voting power.

EDIT: The only truly fair way that I can think of currently is 1 NXT = 1 vote.

[1714740485]

1714740485

[1714740485]

1714740485

[TwinWinNerD]

Why is there even a discussion? This is a POS currency, that says it is a 100% POS currency, now people want to game the POS system?  lol@game playing, that is basically POW and the reason i prefer this coin over others.

1 NXT = 1 Vote but we should include a 0.01% Fee on voting (1 FEE or 0.01% whatever is higher)

[msin]

Ethereum just killed NXT.

Same with all the others.

A POW inflationary coin, hardly.

Actually there is a maximum amount. It just takes longer to mine them all, however there is a limit. Inflation also trends to zero.

What is the maximum?  I hope Ethereum is successful, alt coins can co-exist, this isn't Highlander.  Also, the name is terrible, and the POW will ultimately kill the project.

Haha, nevermind, just saw there are 1.2 Trillion Ethereums, all at the cheap price of 10k per 1BTC, what an insane ripoff.  At least projects like eMu will pay you interest on your holdings.  The creator is 19 years old, hence the WOW reference.  Also, let me get this right, it's a POW, with a pre-sale IPO?  Glad I did a little research before wasting a BTC.

[xyzzyx]

I think it could but it does require a bit of "thinking outside of the box" - I could envision some sort of decentralised online *game* which you have to play in order to vote (you only get to vote when you finish the game).

If you limit the time window (and make the game something that might take an hour or so to complete) then I think you'd get close to 1 vote per person (you'll never get it 100% right).

Even this could be subverted by those with deep pockets as longs as there are people willing to get paid to do HIT work:
https://requester.mturk.com/

It's really a question of whether a "democracy" is what is wanted or whether instead it should just be the largest stakeholders that make the decisions.

Maybe a better way is to simply *pay* for a vote - so if you want to vote 10K times it costs you 10K NXT (with the funds being used on whatever is being voted for I guess).

Paying per vote will also favor deep pockets.   I suspect if voting was implemented by what may essentially be a poll tax, it would discourage all but the wealthiest from voting.  Being poor is costly.

Voting based on 1 vote per 1 account is easily gamed.  For example if I want a weight of 500 votes, I can spend only 1000 NXT to set 500 accounts up.  This can be done automatically with a little work on a shell script and curl.

Also, I fear voting weighted by PoS may drown out all but the wealthiest.  Pooling votes/proxy voting, as Jack Needles suggested, may be a workable answer here.

Sometimes, there just isn't a good fair answer to a problem -- but only a "fairest" answer.  I think votes weighted by PoS, as much as I don't like it, may be the fairest within a PoS system like Nxt.  <shrug>  

[msin]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

[CIYAM]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

I think the question was within the context of Nxt itself - my understanding is that changes to the protocol or other things that could greatly affect the stakeholders would be subject to a vote.

[User705]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

I think the question was within the context of Nxt itself - my understanding is that changes to the protocol or other things that could greatly affect the stakeholders would be subject to a vote.

Yes exactly.  Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

[CIYAM]

Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

Maybe the first vote should be about that.

[apenzl]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

I think the question was within the context of Nxt itself - my understanding is that changes to the protocol or other things that could greatly affect the stakeholders would be subject to a vote.

Yes exactly.  Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

You decide.

[PeercoinEnthusiast]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

I think the question was within the context of Nxt itself - my understanding is that changes to the protocol or other things that could greatly affect the stakeholders would be subject to a vote.

Yes exactly.  Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

** Opinion **

Like shareholders... the higher your stake is in Nxt, the more votes that should count.  If smaller holders are interested in pushing a vote, they can simply try to rally other stakeholders to their cause and vote in a block.

[msin]

Can someone explain in plain terms what this "voting" is for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

I think the question was within the context of Nxt itself - my understanding is that changes to the protocol or other things that could greatly affect the stakeholders would be subject to a vote.

Yes exactly.  Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

Yes, sorry, that was a smart ass reply.  I think its more than just changes in protocol, think about voting as a mass communication tool for Nxt, very powerful.

[hvezdasmrti]

NXT is tooo expensive, 38 mil. market cap for premined starter up in pre-beta testing? Are you kidding? Adequate price for approving more people would be 10 times lower. At least 10 times.

And the voting system may be abusable very easy, whales may decide to punish all low-share holders and just vote about it... Or just to vote about stealing someones NXT?

[dzarmush]

EDIT: The only truly fair way that I can think of currently is 1 NXT = 1 vote.

Me too.

[Bitventurer]

by the way will voting system be effecting the colored coins with in the system ? let say bob opened a company made an IPO with nxt ... nxters killed the IPO ?

[xyzzyx]

Yes exactly.  Nxt becomes a lot less attractive if major changes can be made by voting.  What changes will be put up for vote?

Everything, I suspect.  At least this is the way it looks to me.  The way I see it, BCNext refuses to play the roll of benevolent dictator.  He set the initial conditions and direction but is slowly removing himself from Nxt decision making.  He's been prodding the community to get together and make decisions as a group concerning Nxt more and more over time.  

Why did he release the source code with three flaws?  Why did he release it with some parts besides the core excised?  Why didn't he just say "here it is in full!" and release everything as he had it?  Why did he make looking at the code, understanding the code a game?  (Find the three flaws!  Win prizes! Fun!)  I suspect the answer to all of these questions is that he wants many eyes on the code and many people to start understand what it is doing so when he is no longer making decisions, the people who are running Nxt -- the people with stake -- can make informed decisions.  

Nxt is a psychological experiment in group dynamics as well as a cryptoplatform.

At least, that's how I see it.  I could be wrong.

[dzarmush]

38 mil. market cap for premined starter up in pre-beta testing?

It's not that Nxt cap high, it's atlcons caps low. Because they are just lousy copies of bitcoin and litecoin (which is a lousy copy of bitcoin). There is nothing in them. So Nxt cap is really low at the moment and it's just because it's in beta. When it's fully launched its cap is 100 higher.

[coolfish]

All =1000000000 nxt; //10b
Ab =account balance;

Case one: Similar 1 nxt = 1 vote

if Ab<=1000; {1 nxt = 1 Vote;} // no fee ,if set fee,the fee will be obtain by large shareholder.
if Ab>1000 and Ab<=10000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All) vote;}
if Ab>10000 and Ab<=100000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All) vote; and min fee=1}
if Ab>100000 and Ab<=1000000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All) vote; and fee= (Ab/All)*10000;} //max fee= 10nxt
if Ab>1000000 and Ab<=10000000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All) vote; and fee= (Ab/All)*20000;} //max fee= 200nxt
if Ab>10000000 and Ab<=100000000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All) vote; and fee= (Ab/All)*20000;}//max fee= 2000nxt
if Ab>100000000; {1 nxt =(1-Ab/All)vote; and fee= (Ab/All)*35000;}//max fee= 3500nxt

But:
Maybe a person owns 100,000,000 ( e.g:  [10000 accounts * 10000 per account]  or [100000 accounts * 1000 per account] ) , do you have better good idea?


Case two: Similar 1 account = 1 vote , No matter how much the amount, fixed amount of voting.

if Ab<1000; {1 account = 0 vote; fee=1 nxt}  //acct less than 1000, no the vote right.
if Ab>1000 and Ab<=10000; {1 account = 1 vote; fee=1 nxt}
if Ab>10000 and Ab<=100000;  {1 account = 1 vote; fee=1 nxt}
....
.....
if Ab>100000000; {1 account = 1 vote; fee=1 nxt}

In this case, the account count is limited, because each must have nxt amount over 1000.
Maximum number of accounts is 1,000,000,000/1000 =1,000,000 vote


E.g:

if a person owns 100,000,000 ( e.g: [100000 accounts * 1000 per account] ) , He Max gets 100000 votes, this is a POS system, which is his right, and he will pay more than 100000 fee. Difficult?

But this system is not the minority game, so a large number of small shareholders have a right to vote too...  
100000 people each owns 1000, will beyond him... Difficult?

So if you want to win the vote, or pay fee >100000 Nxt, or to find >100000 people ( >100000 accounts)

Edit: Case two Add a condition: Block Limit.

[LiQio]

Why is there even a discussion? This is a POS currency, that says it is a 100% POS currency, now people want to game the POS system?  lol@game playing, that is basically POW and the reason i prefer this coin over others.

1 NXT = 1 Vote but we should include a 0.01% Fee on voting (1 FEE or 0.01% whatever is higher)

ATM I have to agree with TwinWinNerD: 1 NXT = 1 vote, but voting should not be free

PS: Just an input - anybody contemplated a double majority yet?
Example in a Yes or No voting (always assuming that voting has a fee):
YES if (number of YES-Nxts bigger than number of NO-Nxts) and (number of YES-Accounts bigger than number of NO-Accounts)

[lyynx]

NXT is tooo expensive, 38 mil. market cap for premined starter up in pre-beta testing? Are you kidding? Adequate price for approving more people would be 10 times lower. At least 10 times.

And the voting system may be abusable very easy, whales may decide to punish all low-share holders and just vote about it... Or just to vote about stealing someones NXT?

Wow, thank you so very much for enlightening us about the price of Nxt. 940+ pages of posts and we are all saved by your competent review of the market.

[rigel]

Why is there even a discussion? This is a POS currency, that says it is a 100% POS currency, now people want to game the POS system?  lol@game playing, that is basically POW and the reason i prefer this coin over others.

1 NXT = 1 Vote but we should include a 0.01% Fee on voting (1 FEE or 0.01% whatever is higher)

ATM I have to agree with TwinWinNerD: 1 NXT = 1 vote, but voting should not be free

PS: Just an imput - anybody contemplated a double majority yet?
Example in a Yes or No voting (always assuming that voting has a fee):
YES if (number of YES-Nxts bigger than number of NO-Nxts) and (number of YES-Accounts bigger than number of NO-Accounts)

This makes the system biased towards NO, so who propose the vote has great power in choosing if the question is "should we do xxx?" or "should we avoid xxx?"