NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[pandaisftw]

Is this possible:

1 vote = paying x% of owend coins

the fee will be devided between the x poorest accounts.

I have 1NXT fee for voting is 2% I pay 0.02NXT fee

I have 1,000,000 NXT I have to pay 20,000NXT

Pin

This will not stop a large holder from transferring 1 NXT to a large amount of accounts, then voting with those accounts to get around the fee. IMO 1 NXT = 1 vote is the simplest, least gamed method.

a %fee for voting might be a possibility. your math failed. if there was a 2% fee, distributing coins to many accounts would increase big stakeholders overall cost.

Hm? He is saying on a per vote basis, you pay (for example) 2%. So a large account with 1,000,000 NXT has to pay 20,000 NXT per vote. He could just send that 20,000 NXT to 10,000 accounts and get 10,000 votes for the price of 1 vote.

[landomata]

Yes, that's what I am saying. If, by lowering fees, we see a large increase in transactions, then it will be worth it to lower fees. The question is, will we see that large of an increase right now? If not, then it may be too early to do so.

That's my point we won;t see large transaction increases because someone is not gonna waste 1 Nxt just to send a simple msg.


the cheaper it is for the user the more they will use the service.....period.

Exactly my point, too.

Also, people like to communicate.
They love to send people chatter.

Give them the ability to do so, and I bet you that transactions will take off.
And Nxt is about transactions.

There is a feature that is usuable, so make it easy and cheap to use.
That's all I am saying.

Community should vote using the ... oh wait...  

I am for putting it to a vote. The poll will run for 1 week on both Nextcoin & Nxtcrypto.org forums.

I can organize the polls on both forums.


POLL QUESTION: SHOULD WE LOWER TRANSACTION FEE TO 0.01 Nxt?

[l8orre]

going to a size-of-wallet voting scheme is plain MEDIEVAL - sure this has been brought up here before, but how about this:

 the number or weights or votes each NXT account gets to cast is related to the ACTIVITY, ie number of transactions that the account generates / has generated over a certain period of time.

[pandaisftw]

Yes, that's what I am saying. If, by lowering fees, we see a large increase in transactions, then it will be worth it to lower fees. The question is, will we see that large of an increase right now? If not, then it may be too early to do so.

That's my point we won;t see large transaction increases because someone is not gonna waste 1 Nxt just to send a simple msg.


the cheaper it is for the user the more they will use the service.....period.

Exactly my point, too.

Also, people like to communicate.
They love to send people chatter.

Give them the ability to do so, and I bet you that transactions will take off.
And Nxt is about transactions.

There is a feature that is usuable, so make it easy and cheap to use.
That's all I am saying.

I agree, maybe we should give it a try. Hopefully people will still forge even though their profits are being cut by up to 99% for the time being to keep the network secure When transaction volume picks up, we will be okay.

[chanc3r]

NXT with humanoid interference can not be perfect.

Pin

 

ok, now we know that pinarello is the second account of CfB. Noone else says things like this...

Or he has just been assimilated by the NXT Continuum

[pandaisftw]

going to a size-of-wallet voting scheme is plain MEDIEVAL - sure this has been brought up here before, but how about this:

 the number or weights or votes each NXT account gets to cast is related to the ACTIVITY, ie number of transactions that the account generates / has generated over a certain period of time.

So DGEX will get 90% of the voting power?

[Damelon]

Yes, that's what I am saying. If, by lowering fees, we see a large increase in transactions, then it will be worth it to lower fees. The question is, will we see that large of an increase right now? If not, then it may be too early to do so.

That's my point we won;t see large transaction increases because someone is not gonna waste 1 Nxt just to send a simple msg.


the cheaper it is for the user the more they will use the service.....period.

Exactly my point, too.

Also, people like to communicate.
They love to send people chatter.

Give them the ability to do so, and I bet you that transactions will take off.
And Nxt is about transactions.

There is a feature that is usuable, so make it easy and cheap to use.
That's all I am saying.

Community should vote using the ... oh wait...  

I am for putting it to a vote. The poll will run for 1 week on both Nextcoin & Nxtcrypto.org forums.

I can organize the polls on both forums.


POLL QUESTION: SHOULD WE LOWER TRANSACTION FEE TO 0.01 Nxt?

Can you, when putting it to the vote, also explain why?
Otherwise we will just get Yes from the small accounts and No from the Forging accounts.
People should vote on the fact that this lowering of the fees is proposed to increase the general worth of the system, not because of their wallets NOW.

[swartzfeger]

going to a size-of-wallet voting scheme is plain MEDIEVAL - sure this has been brought up here before, but how about this:

 the number or weights or votes each NXT account gets to cast is related to the ACTIVITY, ie number of transactions that the account generates / has generated over a certain period of time.

Wouldn't work. I'm in the top 30 (approximately) in number of transactions:

http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=32

That's by virtue of registering a metric shit ton of aliases. That shouldn't give me a louder voice.

The little guys with relatively little NXT are the ones amassing transactions with coinflips, alias squatting etc. Low income mentality shouldn't be rewarded (did I just slam myself?)

[Damelon]

Yes, that's what I am saying. If, by lowering fees, we see a large increase in transactions, then it will be worth it to lower fees. The question is, will we see that large of an increase right now? If not, then it may be too early to do so.

That's my point we won;t see large transaction increases because someone is not gonna waste 1 Nxt just to send a simple msg.


the cheaper it is for the user the more they will use the service.....period.

Exactly my point, too.

Also, people like to communicate.
They love to send people chatter.

Give them the ability to do so, and I bet you that transactions will take off.
And Nxt is about transactions.

There is a feature that is usuable, so make it easy and cheap to use.
That's all I am saying.

I agree, maybe we should give it a try. Hopefully people will still forge even though their profits are being cut by up to 99% for the time being to keep the network secure When transaction volume picks up, we will be okay.

People should know that the proposal of fee lowering is because we expect the transaction volume to go UP.
If that doesn't happen, there is no reason to lower it, with that I agree. It's not a giveaway, it's a way to make features accessible and affordable for the most people.
The idea is to let everyone be able (also the small faucet accounts) to test and enjoy some of the more common features.
There is no problem with more advanced features to be more expensive. You pay for what you get.

[l8orre]

good objection -  it could be capped with a sigmoid function so that voting power does not increase above a certain threshold

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

[chanc3r]

going to a size-of-wallet voting scheme is plain MEDIEVAL - sure this has been brought up here before, but how about this:

 the number or weights or votes each NXT account gets to cast is related to the ACTIVITY, ie number of transactions that the account generates / has generated over a certain period of time.

So DGEX will get 90% of the voting power?

From the thread on NxtCrypto Foundation discussion - not seen gbeirn post it here so I thought i would - I think his analysis of 1 Account 1 Vote is spot on, if you had 500k NXT and you want to vote 250k times, you can but it will cost you 500k NXT to do it.

Personally I think the most democratic way is 1 Account = 1 Vote, regardless of your wealth (amount of NXT). Sure someone could create multiple accounts to have more votes but since it costs NXT to send NXT to other accounts, you couldn't do this for long without going broke.

Imagine I have 10,000 NXT. I can't create 10,000 accounts. At most I could create 5,000. Since if I send 1NXT to 5,000 accounts it costs me 5,000 NXT in transaction fees just to do so. If I want those NXT all back in one account (to increase ability to forge) then I can create even less accounts since I will incur a transaction fee to send NXT from those dummy accounts back to my main account.

This can actually work well early on since it may help to distribute NXT even more.

Another way to prevent the creation of dummy voting accounts would be to have a rule that NXT must remain in an account for a certain number of blocks before a vote to be counted as a valid voting account. Or say for example if a vote comes up at block 45,000 for example, only accounts that have a balance as of block 45,000 are counted for voting.

I think the coolest part about the voting is that we can use the voting system to tweak the voting system as time goes on. We could come up with all sorts of complex algorithms in the future once we see what the NXT ecosystem looks like.  

Any ideas?

Edit: Or maybe even, 1 Account  = 1 Vote but it costs 1NXT per account to vote.

[landomata]

Can you, when putting it to the vote, also explain why?
Otherwise we will just get Yes from the small accounts and No from the Forging accounts.
People should vote on the fact that this lowering of the fees is proposed to increase the general worth of the system, not because of their wallets NOW.

YES this is a very good point

[notsoshifty]

If traffic increased 10-100x to compensate, of course that will be better. So the question is, will lowering fees right now increase traffic by 10-100x? Otherwise many people will stop forging and the network will be more susceptible to an attack.

Right now, the motivation for major stakeholders to keep forging should be simply that: to keep the network secure and avoid their nxt becoming worthless. Any nxt that is earned should be considered a nice bonus. Long term, motivations would be different and nxt earning through forging would be an important factor.

The benefits in reducing the cost per AM to 0.1/0.01 (in terms of driving usage, client development, awareness etc) far outweigh any reduction in forging rates.

Aliases and transfer fees could still be 1nxt, imo.

[kunibopl]

Hm? He is saying on a per vote basis, you pay (for example) 2%. So a large account with 1,000,000 NXT has to pay 20,000 NXT per vote. He could just send that 20,000 NXT to 10,000 accounts and get 10,000 votes for the price of 1 vote.

ahh sorry, what I wrote was nonsense. I assumed 1 Nxt = 1 vote, but with 2% voting fee.

What do you all think about a small fee for voting? should be definitely less than 2%.
It would hamper all attemps to influence people on what to vote, when they have to pay for it.

[lucky88888]

Random Idea for Vote Counter.

instead of 1nxt = 1vote, Do 1account = 1Vote*value of innocence

Using some kind of detection script to detect attempts in possible fraudulent votes by looking into transaction history and summing up whether transactions are directly related to each other and guessing it to be of single owner or different unique owners. The more related, the less value of innocence. Vice versa.

eg. account no. 1234 sends 1nxt to account no. 2345, and 1nxt to account no. 3456.
and all of the related accounts voted. the more of these type of transactions the more alerts it will raise therefore will receive a 0 value of innocence, or a very very low value.

as oppose to.
account no. abcd sends no nxt out. will receive a higher value of innocence.
account with more transactions in history will = higher value of innocence.

eg.
highest alert = 0 points in value of innocence.
med alert = 0.1
low alert = 0.5
neutral = 1

This is all just as an idea. the above math is garbage. (i'm bad in maths)
Maybe set a BOUNTY for the best formulae for this. You might not get a total unique vote system but you can minimize fake votes.

[pandaisftw]

If traffic increased 10-100x to compensate, of course that will be better. So the question is, will lowering fees right now increase traffic by 10-100x? Otherwise many people will stop forging and the network will be more susceptible to an attack.

Right now, the motivation for major stakeholders to keep forging should be simply that: to keep the network secure and avoid their nxt becoming worthless. Any nxt that is earned should be considered a nice bonus. Long term, motivations would be different and nxt earning through forging would be an important factor.

The benefits in reducing the cost per AM to 0.1/0.01 (in terms of driving usage, client development, awareness etc) far outweigh any reduction in forging rates.

Aliases and transfer fees could still be 1nxt, imo.

Agreed, I personally ordered a cubietruck that will arrive in a day or two, so I will be perma-forging no matter what the min fee is. But undeniably, we will lose some percentage of forgers.

[mcjavar]

I agree, Tx fees should only be lowered for messaging.

[rigel]

Is this possible:

1 vote = paying x% of owend coins

the fee will be devided between the x poorest accounts.

I have 1NXT fee for voting is 2% I pay 0.02NXT fee

I have 1,000,000 NXT I have to pay 20,000NXT

Pin

This will not stop a large holder from transferring 1 NXT to a large amount of accounts, then voting with those accounts to get around the fee. IMO 1 NXT = 1 vote is the simplest, least gamed method.

a %fee for voting might be a possibility. your math failed. if there was a 2% fee, distributing coins to many accounts would increase big stakeholders overall cost.

Hm? He is saying on a per vote basis, you pay (for example) 2%. So a large account with 1,000,000 NXT has to pay 20,000 NXT per vote. He could just send that 20,000 NXT to 10,000 accounts and get 10,000 votes for the price of 1 vote.

Sending 20,000 NXT to 10,000 accounts has fees too...

[swartzfeger]

Here's a close-to-final Chinese flyer. Allwelder's info was added.

This will probably be the last piece I work on; calls for english brochure text have gone unanswered (except from Damelon), so there's little need, interest, etc etc.

I had an acquaintance do a Nxt writeup in Hindi and Gujarati, which I'll shelve until and Indian Nxt portal pops up.

jpeg preview:



full size PDF

[wesleyh]

Here's a close-to-final Chinese flyer. Allwelder's info was added.

This will probably be the last piece I work on; calls for english brochure text have gone unanswered (except from Damelon), so there's little need, interest, etc etc.

I had an acquaintance do a Nxt writeup in Hindi and Gujarati, which I'll shelve until and Indian Nxt portal pops up.

jpeg preview:



full size PDF

I always wondered what the image is supposed to represent?