NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[marcus03]

Regarding voting:

I had the plan to create another entry for the AM contest, but since I am busy with my client and real life I am releasing my notes about this into the public domain. Planned to do this in Python...

It's a bit pointless since I understand that NXT itself will have a voting feature, but I think it would be a nice test run for the NXT core implementation.

Take what you think might be usefull.

AM VOTING
*********

-Create a voting
   Send a message from address A to A
   With the Text: "voting:<ID>:<VOTING_TYPE>:<TIMESTAMP_START>:<TIMESTAMP_END>:<OPTION1=<OPTION1DESC>>:<OPTION2=><OPTION2DESC>:<VOTING_DESCRIPTION>"
         VOTING_TYPE=ACCOUNTS or NXT (one account, one vote or one NXT in voters account, one vote)
         <OPTION1DESC>
   Client would need to make sure that <ID> is not already in use
   
-Vote
   Send message to address A with the text "vote:<ID>:OPTION<1..x>"
   
-Counting   
   Go through all messages between <TIMESTAMP_START>:<TIMESTAMP_END> that start with "vote:<ID>:" in transaction time ascending order
   Keep a lookup list sender account number->OPTION<..x>  (Option voted) and replace existing values in the list (accounts can vote more than once and overrule their previous vote
   If <VOTING_TYPE> is ACCOUNT, simple count the number of accounts for each option
   If <VOTING_TYPE> is NXT, lookup the account balance as of <TIMESTAMP_START> and make the sum of all account balances by voted option
   
-Voting interface:
   User enters account number where voting takes place
   Client finds all votes on this address (active/passive)
   User can select a voting on this address by ID and can vote
   if multiple messages with the same voting:?id=<ID>: exist, then only the oldest is used (you can't change a voting setup, but need to create a new one with a different id)

-Result interface
   User enters account number where voting takes place
   Client find all votes on this address (active/passive)
   if multiple messages with the same voting:?id=<ID>: exist, then only the oldest is used (you can't change a voting setup, but need to create a new one with a different id)   
   User enters ID of votes he would like to see the results for
   Client sums up (intermediate) results for the vote and shows them
   
   
   
Better format:
Format like magnet links    "magnet:?xt=urn:sha1:YNCKHTQCWBTRNJIV4WNAE52SJUQCZO5C   "

voting:?id=<ID>:vt=<VOTING_TYPE>:ts=<TIMESTAMP_START>:te=<TIMESTAMP_END>.1=<OPTIONDESC>.2=<OPTIONDESC>:d=<VOTING_DESCRIPTION>"
vote:?id=<ID>:1

[1715675369]

1715675369

[1715675369]

1715675369

[utopianfuture]

i strongly support this. best idea yet.

I support it also although I actually would like to see people have to *pay* to vote (as I don't this has really been tried before and could be an interesting experiment).

Think about it - you can "rig" an outcome by burning up your NXT but how many times can you afford to do that?

Perhaps also rather than just having the NXT being used for such a poll being fed back as fees (which an AM approach would do) why not have the accounts be used for something (but not for what they represent so they can't send themselves money to use).

The thing is i think you could afford to do it a great many times if you profited on each exploitation. So if you could spend 10,000 nxt to have 20,000 payed to you, for example out of the 9million unclaimed fund, then you could use that pay out to do it again, and again, and again.

Probably best to have people vote with tokens and give their votes weight proportional to the stake. The advantage here is that whales will care more about the good of the network than profiting off some small time scam. So we can almost certainly count on the whales to vote with everyones best interest at heart.

The issue of voting have been discussed at length before. This type of voting is too much the rich biased for my taste.

If nxt system develops in that tendency, we are not going to survive in the open source community. Someone will just fork nxt codes and make it more egalitarian. Bad idea I would say. We have to let smaller accounts having a say.

[landomata]

I can do this, give me some time :-) (Later today)

Great! So these are basic requirements:

* List of posts.

* A form to post a new issue to vote, with a text field and URL. Maybe optional deadline.

* Each post can have up to 5 or 10 vote options, similar to forums.

* So several vote options are shown to the user.

* Each "vote" button asks to sign some short random id for this post+option with authorization token (would also be nice to explain how to do it).

* The system then gets user address from API, gets age and balance, checks it and saves in DB, attached to this particular post and vote option.

* Show list of all voters for this post with their votes.

Would be nice if the poster could also define the minimal balance and age required.

So you wouldn't use AM for this?

no

[NxtChg]

So you wouldn't use AM for this?

AM is too obscure and "techy". We need a nice, clean site with all the issues and votes on display.

There's also no reason to load blockchain, when it can be avoided.

Also, asking users to specify various addresses is just too confusing. It should be: came, saw a post, clicked a button, copy/pasted token, done.

[utopianfuture]

Probably best to have people vote with tokens and give their votes weight proportional to the stake. The advantage here is that whales will care more about the good of the network than profiting off some small time scam. So we can almost certainly count on the whales to vote with everyones best interest at heart.

I agree 100%. See my above post  .

We should vote based on account only but there would be qualifications for eligible accounts: 1. seniority of accounts - have to be created before 1000 block for example
2. have a certain amount of NXT such as 1000.

Let me emphasize again: we can't have a rich-biased system in the open source community. Not going to survive.

[CIYAM]

The issue of voting have been discussed at length before. This type of voting is too much the rich biased for my taste.

If nxt system develops in that tendency, we are not going to survive in the open source community. Someone will just fork nxt codes and make it more egalitarian. Bad idea I would say. We have to let smaller accounts having a say.

I think if the votes resulted in better distribution of funds from the bigger stake holders then that could only be a good thing in the long term and if the large stake holders are stupid enough to vote for destructive things then they will have ended up destroying their own wealth in the process.

[Come-from-Beyond]

when do we get voting system NXT self?


Pin

When do u need it?

[NxtChg]

When do u need it?

Yesterday.

[landomata]

So you wouldn't use AM for this?

AM is too obscure and "techy". We need a nice, clean site with all the issues and votes on display.

There's also no reason to load blockchain, when it can be avoided.

Also, asking users to specify various addresses is just too confusing. It should be: came, saw a post, clicked a button, copy/pasted token, done.

how can we make sure only Nxters are voting?

Edit: Account numbers as passwords to the site.

[bitcoinrocks]

How are bitcoin protocol decisions being made at this point?

[NxtChg]

how can we make sure only Nxters are voting?

Edit: Account numbers as passwords to the site.

If you have a valid account, you're a nexter by definition.

No need for any passwords. Authorization token covers everything.

[Anon136]

Probably best to have people vote with tokens and give their votes weight proportional to the stake. The advantage here is that whales will care more about the good of the network than profiting off some small time scam. So we can almost certainly count on the whales to vote with everyones best interest at heart.

If you only have say a 1/4 chance of getting the bounty *despite* your investment then would you still take that risk?

Maybe not but before we get into an involved discussion about risks and crafting proper incentives, let me ask what is the advantage?

If the advantage is to help mitigate the problem of people voting on things they are ignorant about than i think that maybe the best way to deal with that would be a flat rate fee for submitting a token. Then we have only voters who legitimately care and no concern about people gaming the system.

There would be a trade off here. The more you try to mitigate ignorant voting the more risk you have of corruption. It would probably be best to set the fee pretty low because in most cases ignorance cancels with ignorance on the opposite side of the issue.

[CIYAM]

There would be a trade off here. The more you try to mitigate ignorant voting the more risk you have of corruption. It would probably be best to set the fee pretty low because in most cases ignorance cancels with ignorance on the opposite side of the issue.

I agree that the amount to be paid should not need to be more than 1 NXT but I also think that if the total amounts are to be redistributed evenly then someone throwing in a bunch of NXT basically is redistributing their stake as much as influencing the outcome (and if the outcome has only a % chance of directly benefiting them then unlikely they are going to pump that much into it).

Of course designing such a system is no trivial exercise but I think it could be interesting to try something like this out with Nxt.

[utopianfuture]

The issue of voting have been discussed at length before. This type of voting is too much the rich biased for my taste.

If nxt system develops in that tendency, we are not going to survive in the open source community. Someone will just fork nxt codes and make it more egalitarian. Bad idea I would say. We have to let smaller accounts having a say.

I think if the votes resulted in better distribution of funds from the bigger stake holders then that could only be a good thing in the long term and if the large stake holders are stupid enough to vote for destructive things then they will have ended up destroying their own wealth in the process.

It doesn't matter big holders are wise or stupid. It is a matter of fair representation. Smaller acc holders could leave NXT for a fork if their voice cannot be heard and feel their votes do not matter.

We are building a community here not a club of big stake holders. And if the small acc holders are leaving NXT, there won't be any money to support big-rich-stake holders.

[davethetrousers]

RaspNXT - a standalone NXT environment for the Raspberry Pi

I just modified your run_nxt.sh to be more raspian frendly with some log messages and to enable system startup and stop.

kewl!

I had intentionally left the matter of starting/stopping the server open, so that people could decide themselves how they would like to do it. This seems like another good option for it.

That said, I am in fact planning on enhancing the package myself to a script that does all relevant things on any -nix system, not only the RPi.

[CIYAM]

We are building a community here not a club of big stake holders. And if the small acc holders are leaving NXT, there won't be any money to support big-rich-stake holders.

If the rich stake holders are "paying" the smaller stake holders in order to "get their way" then aren't the smaller stake holders becoming bigger stake holders?

In PoS what matters is your *stake* so I think anything that helps increase small holders stake can't be a bad thing.

BTW - I am in no way a "big stake holder" so don't think that I am thinking about this "as a whale".

[utopianfuture]

how can we make sure only Nxters are voting?

Edit: Account numbers as passwords to the site.

If you have a valid account, you're a nexter by definition.

No need for any passwords. Authorization token covers everything.

I prefer a separate voting site to using AM function. No need to bloat the blockchain and we can incorporate the voting site into the clients.

[landomata]

how can we make sure only Nxters are voting?

Edit: Account numbers as passwords to the site.

If you have a valid account, you're a nexter by definition.

No need for any passwords. Authorization token covers everything.

I prefer a separate voting site to using AM function. No need to bloat the blockchain and we can incorporate the voting site into the clients.

what about DDOS of the site? how to stop this?

[coolmist]

Probably best to have people vote with tokens and give their votes weight proportional to the stake. The advantage here is that whales will care more about the good of the network than profiting off some small time scam. So we can almost certainly count on the whales to vote with everyones best interest at heart.

I agree 100%. See my above post  .

We should vote based on account only but there would be qualifications for eligible accounts: 1. seniority of accounts - have to be created before 1000 block for example
2. have a certain amount of NXT such as 1000.

Let me emphasize again: we can't have a rich-biased system in the open source community. Not going to survive.

Ok, this makes sense. Wouldn't want graviton to be able to swing every vote  .  Is there a way to call the maturity of an account?

EDIT: Also, is there a server open for API calls that is already up and running?

[utopianfuture]

We are building a community here not a club of big stake holders. And if the small acc holders are leaving NXT, there won't be any money to support big-rich-stake holders.

If the rich stake holders are "paying" the smaller stake holders in order to "get their way" then aren't the smaller stake holders becoming bigger stake holders?

In PoS what matters is your *stake* so I think anything that helps increase small holders stake can't be a bad thing.

BTW - I am in no way a "big stake holder" so don't think that I am thinking about this "as a whale".

Well some people just doesn't like the idea that some rich guys can buy their votes. That's enough of a reason for someone not joining the community.