[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[Jestah]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

[coins101]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

One MN, one vote. If you're going to have a voting system, that's the best way for something like this.

[oblox]

ASN is going to the MOON https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-ASN 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1033900.60

Fuck off with your coin spam.

[TanteStefana2]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

I'm sure there will be solutions to this mimicking the way stock votes are handled in the real world.  You know, I"m all for revolution, but there is no "perfect" in this world, and frankly, not every system developed to make things run needs to be reinvented.  We don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater!  And you know, as the cost of masternodes goes up too high for normal people to participate, there will be shares (as there are already, but trustless shares) in masternodes available without doubt.

[Jestah]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

My biggest fear is the sock puppets saying it's centralized.  lol

[Minotaur26]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

It depends on the application, this model has many different angles. In the context of a market, where people take different levels of risk and contribute proportionately to their investment it totally has to be one vote per collateral bond of trust. It also floats as people come and go, it is truly flexible. I thought of a different application and posted something on dct:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is such a profound concept, I am very proud to be part of this community. We are tackling the hard problems of the industry and looking for solutions that go beyond what anyone has done before. This has so many different applications, take the Ministry of Agriculture of your country for example. Instead of being handled by one minister in his high horse, it could be handled in a transparent and practical way by an assembly of farmers, through a blockchain. That could be the Ministry of Agriculture blockchain, the ministry's fiat budget would pegged to the emission of that blockchain, and everyone in the ministry could be a blockchain employee. On top of that all the projects and initiatives would be available in a public website. This is so powerful is the next step in democracy since the ancient Greeks.

There so many applications for this and it shows we are thinking in a much deeper level about the hard issues of crypto and society. Truly inspiring.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see on my example there are many ways to set something like this up, depending on the application.

[Minotaur26]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

My biggest fear is the sock puppets saying it's centralized.  lol

This is as decentralized as any practical system of governance gets, think about it for a while.   Think about Bitcoin, the core developers are losing their independence and now working for  a private university(MIT), that is a private business. How is that for centralized?  There was just no prevision for the long term sustainability of the platform.

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-core-developers-join-mit-digital-currency-initiative/

[ddink7]

Self-sustainable Decentralized Governance by Blockchain

https://dashtalk.org/threads/self-sustainable-decentralized-governance-by-blockchain.4708/

Bump!

[TanteStefana2]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

My biggest fear is the sock puppets saying it's centralized.  lol

The whole point of crypto currency is to make it unmanipulable by banksters and governments, not to reject everything banking and large corporations have come up with that could help cryptos function.  Sure "corporation" is a nasty word, but running a crypto that will fund the world is HUGE!  It has to have a structure that will oversee it.  Perhaps it should have a republican infrastructure (Not like the party, like the structure)  I HIGHLY suggest NEVER making it a pure democracy.  That never works.  However, perhaps eventually having a "public" voting system to direct the masternode vote might work and give everyone a voice.  Just a thought.  Remember, we have to get this all working first! 

But what a cool concept, eh? 

[TanteStefana2]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

It depends on the application, this model has many different angles. In the context of a market, where people take different levels of risk and contribute proportionately to their investment it totally has to be one vote per collateral bond of trust. It also floats as people come and go, it is truly flexible. I thought of a different application and posted something on dct:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is such a profound concept, I am very proud to be part of this community. We are tackling the hard problems of the industry and looking for solutions that go beyond what anyone has done before. This has so many different applications, take the Ministry of Agriculture of your country for example. Instead of being handled by one minister in his high horse, it could be handled in a transparent and practical way by an assembly of farmers, through a blockchain. That could be the Ministry of Agriculture blockchain, the ministry's fiat budget would pegged to the emission of that blockchain, and everyone in the ministry could be a blockchain employee. On top of that all the projects and initiatives would be available in a public website. This is so powerful is the next step in the democracy since the ancient Greeks.

There so many applications for this and it shows we are thinking in a much deeper level about the hard issues of crypto and society. Truly inspiring.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see on my example there are many ways to set something like this up, depending on the application.

F'in Hell, Minotaur, we ARE changing the world........... AGAIN!  You all always remind me that my mind is far too small!  LOVE IT!

[fernando]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

It would work the same as shares in a company.  Frankly, I see voting being a huge responsibility and am afraid it will be too much for some masternode owners.  We'll be required to review proposals AND keep an eye on them or the committee assigned to them.  A lot like a board of directors.  Frankly, I can see this becoming a real job, if not even possibly overwhelming job in the next few years.

However, because masternode owners have a pretty large stake in the coin, they will hopefully make good decisions for everyone on the whole.  It's so revolutionary, only time will tell I guess.

My biggest fear is the sock puppets saying it's centralized.  lol

Let the puppets be puppets. It doesn't matter what we do, they will criticize. The real impact has to happen outside of the forums.

And, if we implement this right, there is no way they can say this is centralized.

[Gi01]

Guys, who is able to explain me (or point out a doc) where enforcement is explained?

I am discovering few things, correct me:

- A miner can "jump" a payment to a MN if the protocol isn't enforced. So if there is a new protocol and we are below 80% a miner can literally steal money
- MNs are not, literally, forced to upgrade protocol. They will keep getting Dashes
- Some MNs are running extremely old protocols and there are no consequences for them

Am i wrong? Why should I update my daemon (losing money and time in the process) if there is no penalty?

Hi Gi01....theres lots of great information out there on this  throughout here and at DAShpay.io.  I'm sure someone in our Dev team can compile this info.   It's a great question and as a masternode operator,  it's something we have discussed at length with some great ideas and solutions.  I'll let the Dev team put that together...

Every link is welcome

@ddink7, pardon me, but there are some nodes carrying versione .17 that are still getting money. That's what i mean

Regarding "uncorrect" miners, is there a way to solve this? It looks terrible from an investor's perspective

[busterzzz]

Self-sustainable Decentralized Governance by Blockchain

https://dashtalk.org/threads/self-sustainable-decentralized-governance-by-blockchain.4708/

Bump!

this part is rad

Besides that, masternodes will be able to vote on the introduction of this change, making the first distributed decision the actual creation of the system, similar to establishing a Constitution.

[ddink7]

Guys, who is able to explain me (or point out a doc) where enforcement is explained?

I am discovering few things, correct me:

- A miner can "jump" a payment to a MN if the protocol isn't enforced. So if there is a new protocol and we are below 80% a miner can literally steal money
- MNs are not, literally, forced to upgrade protocol. They will keep getting Dashes
- Some MNs are running extremely old protocols and there are no consequences for them

Am i wrong? Why should I update my daemon (losing money and time in the process) if there is no penalty?

Hi Gi01....theres lots of great information out there on this  throughout here and at DAShpay.io.  I'm sure someone in our Dev team can compile this info.   It's a great question and as a masternode operator,  it's something we have discussed at length with some great ideas and solutions.  I'll let the Dev team put that together...

Every link is welcome

@ddink7, pardon me, but there are some nodes carrying versione .17 that are still getting money. That's what i mean

Regarding "uncorrect" miners, is there a way to solve this? It looks terrible from an investor's perspective

Please provide links to those MNs that are still getting payments. It's my understanding that it isn't supposed to work that way. As for the bad-acting miners, they get about 48 hours of extra money once every couple of months. Not a big deal IMO.

[qwizzie]

Self-sustainable Decentralized Governance by Blockchain

https://dashtalk.org/threads/self-sustainable-decentralized-governance-by-blockchain.4708/

Self-sustainable Decentralized Governance by Blockchain : a 100% decentralized system powered by the masternodes and based on their voting mechanism where budgets are set and paid directly from the blockchain.

i like the concept, it demonstrates how serious this project has become both for the dev team and towards investors. Also it shows foresight in tackling some of the
problems Bitcoin is currently struggling with (organising funding and development in a structured decentralised way).
  

[CryptoChronic]

You should not be able to vote more than once.  Just like in the real world.   I don't care if you're the biggest whale there is, you shouldn't have more say than anyone else.

I actually understand why you say that. But if you have two MNs, how would you be limited to one vote?

You can't with it being anon and all.   It's a flawed concept.   Brilliant....but it's off a little.

One MN, one vote. If you're going to have a voting system, that's the best way for something like this.

So otoh and instaminers get all the votes? Your centralizing your system even more. Terrible idea

[Gi01]

Please provide links to those MNs that are still getting payments. It's my understanding that it isn't supposed to work that way. As for the bad-acting miners, they get about 48 hours of extra money once every couple of months. Not a big deal IMO.

https://dashninja.pl/mndetails.html?mnpubkey=XtKaWTPjdkyXx98xVYvTq22fQ5koHfmpsK It's an example, and not a lonely one

Regarding the ability of these miners to get some extra buck at every protocol updated (skipping, in the process, some of the legitimate receivers) believe me, can be a blocker for big investors.

[qwizzie]

Please provide links to those MNs that are still getting payments. It's my understanding that it isn't supposed to work that way. As for the bad-acting miners, they get about 48 hours of extra money once every couple of months. Not a big deal IMO.

https://dashninja.pl/mndetails.html?mnpubkey=XtKaWTPjdkyXx98xVYvTq22fQ5koHfmpsK It's an example, and not a lonely one

Regarding the ability of these miners to get some extra buck at every protocol updated (skipping, in the process, some of the legitimate receivers) believe me, can be a blocker for big investors.

thats very weird and definetely needs some looking into by the dev team...

[toknormal]

So otoh and instaminers get all the votes? Your centralizing your system even more.

Why should it be any other way ?

[CryptoChronic]

So otoh and instaminers get all the votes? Your centralizing your system even more.

Why should it be any other way ?

 I know you mean that sarcastically but you should be careful what you write, others may not take it that way