Biblepay BBP Community Discussion Thread

[secoccular]

Which coins are trading at 4sats and have a masternode requirement of a few thousand dollars?

I think the masternode issue is just an outgrowth of the pricing problem with BBP. Turning 4 sats into a few thousand dollars is a lot more difficult than turning Dash's $100 price into $100K masternodes. ($100K  = 1000 times $100 price for Dash). By my math, it takes 1.4 million times price of $0.000203 for a BBP masternode at $300.  BBP is a far more expensive.

You needlessly convert to dollars - you don't need math, it's simply 1.55m coins for a BBP masternode and 1000 coins for a Dash masternode. But you missed something - BiblePay is one of the larger circulation coins out there. In fact, its circulation is 1.5b, while Dash's is 8.7m, which is about 170 times more coins. So to be able to make an analogous comparison between the two, we need to divide the 1.55m masternode cost by 170, which is around 9000 BBP. So a BBP masternode is 9 times more expensive in relative terms than a Dash masternode, but not 1500 times. But in absolute terms, it's extremely cheap. Of course, it's all about the price - if we had a 9 times higher price like we used to (36 sats), that would solve the cheap masternode problem.

I convert to fiat because that's the ultimate value. If there was no conversion, all the talk about performance is just that.

I'm probably too dense to understand the difference between the number of coins. We can't compare 8.7m to 1.5b because the number of coins is largely a function of pricing. Dash can't have a billion coins at its current pricing, and BBP can't have 10m coins at its current price. This is exactly why I use the fiat conversion, because both price and circulation are different. But again, I'm probably misinterpreting your post. And I can see my math is a bit wonky.

At a daily volume of around $250M, Dash has a masternode cost of .004 DailiyVolume. BBP has a mastnerode cost around a day's total trading volume. BBP is far less liquid, and is more expensive percentage-wise for a masternode.

I agree, liquidity is terrible in BBP.

This is by far my greatest concern. We have to see increased volume to know that the current path is leading to success. I don't see how playing with the sanctuary pricing will make the volume go up. $200/day is $200, no matter what it buys.

For wannabe investors, yes, but for any average investor, $300 is not even worth looking at. I mean the monthly income is not worth the hassle and hosting fees. If you are so confident that raising the masternode requirement is bad, then why not lower it? Let's make it cost $50, what do you say?

I don't think the price per masternode is so relevant. If the average investor has $100K to invest, they're looking at buying 300 sanctuaries or getting in on a shared Dash node. Either way, their absolute $100K investment can work in both scenarios, and just comes down to performance. But imagine the fun of having 300 BBP nodes and outvoting Rob.

Changing the cost to $50 wouldn't have any effect I can see. Again, investors have a set amount of money to invest. at $50 everyone is just getting more masternodes for their dollar. Is there any competitive edge to lowering the cost? Is thee any issue with flooding the network with masternodes at a cheaper price, other than the rewards being spread thinner? Even then, is the return on investment any different either way?

What will make a difference is to get some trading volume and buying pressure that is organic to growth, and not just inflating volume by raising masternode requirements. I wish less effort was being made towards new features that are cool but may not help pricing.

I agree we should have more organic growth, but that's an easy thing to say. I don't agree with your last sentence however, because I know many coins which don't do anything, just have some hype and not any actual features and regular (or any) development. I think that active development is one of the most important factors for a coin's health and attractiveness. Why we don't have more people interested in BiblePay, it's anyone's guess, but I would say it has a lot to do with the name itself and the religious features, and that is the hardest obstacle which we may never overcome.

True, there's a lot of empty-calorie projects out there. I also think the name isn't helping. When I hear Biblepay, I think of Paypal, or some method of paying for goods. But as we know, adoption of a coin is a really rare and limited thing. So when someone asks, "What can I pay for with Biblepay?", we can only say Subway sandwiches?

I don't think religion is the issue, other than certain people inserting their personal religious beliefs in the discussions here and on SX chat. If a person doesn't agree with those beliefs, it can be off-putting, even if the person is Christian. I'd like to see BBP more inclusive, focusing on its core values rather than when the world is going to end.

[inblue]

I convert to fiat because that's the ultimate value. If there was no conversion, all the talk about performance is just that.

I agree about the dollar value, but I meant literally, you don't need dollars and math to get this "1.4 million times" result:
"By my math, it takes 1.4 million times price of $0.000203 for a BBP masternode at $300."

Because "$0.000203" relates to 1 BBP and "$300" relates to 1.55m BBP, so it's just 1.55m coins for a masternode and that is 1.55 million times the price, not 1.4 million.

When I hear Biblepay, I think of Paypal, or some method of paying for goods. But as we know, adoption of a coin is a really rare and limited thing. So when someone asks, "What can I pay for with Biblepay?", we can only say Subway sandwiches?

Exactly how I feel. I focused on the religious part, but I forgot to write that the "pay" part really bugs me. It's totally misleading, because BiblePay is not a payment service and its primary goal is something completely unrelated to the name. And the average Joe doesn't care about the fact that the algorithm uses Bible verses. A relevant name would be "CharityChain" or something of the sort. Also, one of the most problematic things is that the BiblePay name evidently looks like a joke to many who encounter it for the first time, which I don't think is possible to amend without changing the name. It's a shame that people can't take BiblePay seriously, since it's a coin with one of the most serious goals I know, and with serious active development.

[secoccular]

I convert to fiat because that's the ultimate value. If there was no conversion, all the talk about performance is just that.

I agree about the dollar value, but I meant literally, you don't need dollars and math to get this "1.4 million times" result:
"By my math, it takes 1.4 million times price of $0.000203 for a BBP masternode at $300."

Because "$0.000203" relates to 1 BBP and "$300" relates to 1.55m BBP, so it's just 1.55m coins for a masternode and that is 1.55 million times the price, not 1.4 million.

When I hear Biblepay, I think of Paypal, or some method of paying for goods. But as we know, adoption of a coin is a really rare and limited thing. So when someone asks, "What can I pay for with Biblepay?", we can only say Subway sandwiches?

Exactly how I feel. I focused on the religious part, but I forgot to write that the "pay" part really bugs me. It's totally misleading, because BiblePay is not a payment service and its primary goal is something completely unrelated to the name. And the average Joe doesn't care about the fact that the algorithm uses Bible verses. A relevant name would be "CharityChain" or something of the sort. Also, one of the most problematic things is that the BiblePay name evidently looks like a joke to many who encounter it for the first time, which I don't think is possible to amend without changing the name. It's a shame that people can't take BiblePay seriously, since it's a coin with one of the most serious goals I know, and with serious active development.

You hit the nail on the head with "its primary goal is something completely unrelated to the name." If the project was primarily to take rewards and distribute Bibles with them, then BiblePay would be a decent name. But there's nothing about Biblepay that makes me think of orphans. I'd guess that the original hope was (as is for most crypto) that there would be more adoption. If so, the name makes more sense.

"CharityChain" is actually a pretty good name. I was trying to think of something more Christian-sounding, but I like CharityCoin because it doesn't put religion first. I strongly feel the world needs help wherever it can get it--and not just from a platform for religious giving. It would be kind of cool--having charity as the name's focus, and keeping the Jesus stuff there, but not at the forefront.

As poor as I am at predicting things with BBP, I'm fairly certain Rob isn't up for a name change, with all the investment in the current name and logo. Changing branding is a bunch of work, and better done earlier than later. Still it's an interesting discussion about how the name reflects the coin's purpose. It would probably take the project being abandoned or a hard fork to make it an option. We'll see.

Edit: Saw you posted this on the main thread. I'll keep my reply here.

[sunk818]

I like having Christian values first. Charity coin might limit the purpose of a coin. Maybe if Christian values is to forward the kingdom, you might support translation of Bible in new languages/dialects. Or supporting individuals in jail that spread the Gospel. Charity can be an important aspect, but I don't feel it should be the only mission of a Christian based coin.

In terms of economics... Bitcoin is 21M. 90% of that will be mined ~2029. BiblePay's 5.2B will be around 90% also at the same time. I say all this say that you multipley Bitcoin's 21M x 247 to get to 5.2B. If you multiply BiblePay's fiat value of $0.00026305 x 247, you only get $0.0649 as opposed to Bitcoin $5,250.

Like you guys said... no trade volume. Most of what you see is price manipulation by bots selling and buying. So, I even question any activity aside from someone buying a masternode or selling for charity. Then you have a volatile dictator for a lead dev, so that instills very little confidence. Those are not good recipes for growing the community. Greed can only drive a coin so far. The holy grail for crypto has always been daily use of the coin. To get the network effect, people have the spend the coin beyond charity. The charity is not even community based. It is one person selling on an exchange for fiat.

I think the Proof of Sponsorship was a great idea. You have individuals sponsor a child. They are responsible for that child. You show documents, receipts, etc. And the community votes on your proposal for that child. That gives each person a reason to sponsor a child and get BBP in return. It'd be pretty powerful to say you have thousands of sponsors.

[sunk818]

https://hbr.org/2019/04/want-fewer-employees-to-quit-listen-to-them

In this context, investors are the employees. Listen to the community and you will have happier "employees".

Management 101

Or the golden rule:

Matthew 7:12 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Golden Rule
12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

[sunk818]

PrivateSend - Coin Mixing
https://wiki.biblepay.org/PrivateSend

===

Old Notes:

You have to mix your coins (anonymize them) before being able to send them with PrivateSend

Open Wallet >>> Overview Tab >>> click the "Start Mixing" button in bottom left

I believe BiblePay Wallet defaults to 2,000 coins mixed for 2 rounds

Settings >>> Options >>> Wallet >>> Enable advanced PrivateSend interface, Enable PrivateSend multi-session

I added this to my biblepay.conf file to increase amount and restarted my wallet

privatesendamount=2000000

===

How Dash's 'PrivateSend' Works Under the Hood
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgCId3wJc5Y

===

I wrote a script to set up a liquidity provider (server that keeps doing coin mixing):
https://github.com/togoshigekata/biblepay-files/blob/master/liquid-install-togo.sh

===

What is fungibility and why does it matter?
https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/1967/what-is-fungibility-and-why-does-it-matter

Default got raised in 200k I believe in BiblePay (<1.2) but on Evo, rob took it back to 2k. Maybe he will merge the code back to allow bigger denominations.

[sunk818]

What about all the credit for the groundbreaking things you dont know about yet... or the overall good we(ve) done (All credit to Jesus), or the originality coming out of BiblePay over the long run?  (Mean spirited people will say anything).

I should credit to Rob for things I don't know about yet. What a crazy egotistical guy.

[tx_ben]

I thought Yuri had sold off the exchange to the founder of Gridcoin + BiblePay ? Makes sense since those are the only coins left on there, and only the BiblePay dev seems to be able to contact "Yuri" at will...

Not sure if it is true or not but I've heard that a few times now.

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me? Was there an announcement?

[sunk818]

I thought Yuri had sold off the exchange to the founder of Gridcoin + BiblePay ? Makes sense since those are the only coins left on there, and only the BiblePay dev seems to be able to contact "Yuri" at will...

Not sure if it is true or not but I've heard that a few times now.

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me? Was there an announcement?

You've heard this from whom? Where are you reading these rumors?

[sunk818]

Hey Everyone,
It has been a while, and there have been a LOT of changes since I last checked in on BBP.  I started mining again, and I am curious as to what "Proof of Power" is under some of my received transactions.  Is that the bonus that Rob added for using purepool? 

Thanks,
ride22

I haven't heard of that - is this in Purepool?  If so Licht might have to answer that.

Someone added a joke last week called PROWL (proof of orphan writing letters) but it was not me.

Yes, that's what Purepool calls payments in the wallet.

I've used purepool for BiblePay for a year. I always get to pick the address it pays to.

I was thinking it had more to do with Rob's 10 day bonus thing from the pool?

[tx_ben]

I thought Yuri had sold off the exchange to the founder of Gridcoin + BiblePay ? Makes sense since those are the only coins left on there, and only the BiblePay dev seems to be able to contact "Yuri" at will...

Not sure if it is true or not but I've heard that a few times now.

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me? Was there an announcement?

You've heard this from whom? Where are you reading these rumors?

I'm more of a discord person than bitcointalk - but during the mass delisting there were a few different coins getting removed from C-CEX whose members were putting this theory forward in their own discord channels. I remember somebody asking directly in the CCEX chat and someone else said they asked on twitter but didn't get an answer. Sorry I don't have the exact links, I'd have to do more historical searching than I think this is worth. We got an official denial in the other Biblepay forum anyway, so that's fine. I expected it might just be a rumor, looks like that was the case.

[sunk818]

I thought Yuri had sold off the exchange to the founder of Gridcoin + BiblePay ? Makes sense since those are the only coins left on there, and only the BiblePay dev seems to be able to contact "Yuri" at will...

Not sure if it is true or not but I've heard that a few times now.

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me? Was there an announcement?

You've heard this from whom? Where are you reading these rumors?

I'm more of a discord person than bitcointalk - but during the mass delisting there were a few different coins getting removed from C-CEX whose members were putting this theory forward in their own discord channels. I remember somebody asking directly in the CCEX chat and someone else said they asked on twitter but didn't get an answer. Sorry I don't have the exact links, I'd have to do more historical searching than I think this is worth. We got an official denial in the other Biblepay forum anyway, so that's fine. I expected it might just be a rumor, looks like that was the case.

The Discord link for BiblePay is here:
https://discord.gg/RK8n4xh

You seem like a reasonable person. Thanks for asking questions and keeping an open mind.

[yaronidon]

Hi Sunk818,
In biblepay forum you wrote:
https://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=394.15

"Vps cost less than $1/mo."


How do I get VPS for less than 1$/month ?

[sunk818]

Hi Sunk818,
In biblepay forum you wrote:
https://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=394.15

"Vps cost less than $1/mo."


How do I get VPS for less than 1$/month ?

It can be a crapshoot with overloaded/oversubscribed... but you get a few vendors that actually do a good job. DM me and I'll send you a few I've worked with in the past. $1/mo or less is a gamble... if you pay $2/mo you get KVM VPS which is better than OpenVZ. I suggest you read lowendtalk or lowendbox and also read reviews of the company. My recommendation is never go for the 3yr double the resources offer because you don't know if the host will be around that long. Maybe 1 yr is worth the risk, but go monthly if you can.

[togoshigekata]

sunk818, [07.05.19 12:36]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Rob put a proposal in to change GridCoin to have masternodes component and the community voted against him. So, he learned from that. He made BiblePay added a masternode component and has had voting control through masternode ownership ever since.

Togoshige, [07.05.19 12:40]
@sunk818 Do you have any proof that Rob has "voting control" of BiblePay?

Togoshige, [07.05.19 12:40]
to have full voting control you would need to own 55%+ of the masternodes ("Proposal approval occurs when yes votes minus no votes equals 10% or more of the total available votes.")

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:08]
[In reply to Togoshige]
I've done blockchain analysis to see how many masternodes he owns. I estimate he has 125-150 masternodes. That means he has voting control..

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:14]
[In reply to K - GIN▪XZC▪ZEN▪POLIS]
Dangerous in the sense that power is consolidated to fewer people and those that want to join now need to purchase more BBP to get involved. This will ensure Rob will cement his voting power plus spend less on hosting fees to do it. Its a win-win for him.  Unfortunately, the voting details are not working right now... https://forum.biblepay.org/cc/governance/116850 — but when non-Rob masternode holders voted against this proposal, all of the sudden, there was a 100 yes votes, then another 25 yes more from recently created masternodes originating from addresses that Rob owned. They came from the Orphan Foundation address and his Proof of Giving (BME6) address.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:15]
@sunk818 Document your analysis for all to see and view over, otherwise its just speculation

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:15]
I just want to be clear that this project is centralized lead by one person. Nothing wrong with that. Many small altcoins have to operate this way. Its that Rob wants to give this miscommunication of the project being "decentralized" by a "community".

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:15]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Anyone can see on the blockchain. I've posted the links on Discord before.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:15]
Assuming Rob does own 25% of masternodes, how is that voting control? Only 35% have to vote against

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:16]
Do you understand what "voting control" means?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:17]
What does voting control mean to you?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:17]
Why are you trying to FUD what I've written?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:17]
Why are you spreading FUD?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:17]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Apparently, not the same as yours. You want to count total masternodes.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:18]
Explain your definition then

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:18]
[In reply to Togoshige]
There's no FUD in what I've written. — only truth.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:18]
because 150 masternodes out of 600 masternodes is not control

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:18]
rob votes + other votes = total votes

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:19]
rob votes / total votes = rob has voting control

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:19]
You have no documentation to back up your claim of how many masternodes Rob may own, show me your full documentation/analysis

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:19]
You assume people that are not voting dont count?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:19]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Why? You're already calling me FUDster.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:20]
[In reply to Togoshige]
people that do not vote are not voters.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:20]
that is by definition

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:21]
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/tx.dws?772869.htm

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:21]
follow the biggest output - that leads you to: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/tx.dws?924074.htm

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:21]
Choosing not to vote is a choice, they still have voting power, but you seem to like to not count them in at all

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:22]
What is the Total Votes for your equation?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:23]
[In reply to Togoshige]
not voting is a choice, but by definition, that is not a vote.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:23]
I just looked at the consolidation proposal, there were 424 total votes

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:24]
Assuming like you say that Rob has 150 votes, thats 150/424 = ~35%

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:24]
that is not voting control like you claim

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:25]
and you still have not shown your full analysis/proof of how many masternodes you believe Rob to have, it is just speculation

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:26]
I just gave you a link.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:27]
If that's your attitude, I don't need to bother.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:27]
You gave a link that shows 39 million BBP

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:28]
Rob only needed 10% over 163.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:28]
Ive disproven your claim of voting control

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:28]
Unless voting control to you means 25% masternodes, 35% of masternodes that vote

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:28]
LOL

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:28]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Not really. You picked one proposal that had the biggest turnout ever.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:29]
Look at every other proposal that passed since the inception of the project.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:29]
Oh so now the parameters of what Total Votes means changes? And all the non-voters get cast out still?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:32]
total votes are by proposal. how else do you calculate it?

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:32]
non-voters are not voters. why do you keep bringing up a point that's a red herring.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:33]
Just because they dont vote now on something, doesnt mean they wont vote later, look at the consolidation proposal

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:33]
Yes, I have no argument with that. What's your point?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:34]
You claim Rob has voting control, assuming your numbers, I disproved you on that, or do you feel that my analysis is incorrect?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:35]
Or will your stance change to, "sometimes" Rob has voting control lol

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:35]
because of others not voting

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:35]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Yes, your analysis is incorrect. You looked at one proposal.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:35]
There were others that voted yes on that proposal.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:39]
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/tx.dws?924071.htm is the link I sent you for Apr 2019 where he created 25 masternodes to swing the vote his way.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:48]
Im all for transparency, but youve made false claims of voting control and keep changing your definitions and parameters on it, and on the masternode ownership count you havent documented your analysis publically all together in a report and have only given 2 explorer links today —— I want the truth to be spread, not speculation, and youve been spreading speculation as fact

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:53]
[In reply to Togoshige]
That's your opinion. I've made no false claims. Your reception to the link I've posted shows you're not interested in transparency.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:54]
I've not changed any definitions on the definition of "voting control". You misunderstand what it means to vote vs owning a masternode.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:54]
I guess you're not familiar with how the voting process works.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:55]
sunk818, [08.05.19 12:18]
rob votes + other votes = total votes

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:19]
rob votes / total votes = rob has voting control

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:55]
Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:23]
I just looked at the consolidation proposal, there were 424 total votes

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:24]
Assuming like you say that Rob has 150 votes, thats 150/424 = ~35%

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:55]
And then after that you couldnt define what  "total votes" means

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:56]
total votes is 424.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:57]
plus the 4 that put in abstain vote

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:57]
Then how does your claim that "Rob has voting control" stand up against this?, Ive shown that Rob, by your numbers, Did in fact not have voting control

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:58]
150 is enough to influence the vote and have voting control

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:58]
So now your definition changes once again

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:59]
My definition hasn't changed. You keep saying that.

sunk818, [08.05.19 12:59]
You think he needs to have 250 yes votes to have voting control?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:00]
He just needs to vote enough to get to 10% net yes and that's voting control for DASH & BiblePay.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:22]
Your spreading misinformation that Rob has control of voting, Ive disproven you, Why cant you accept it?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:24]
[In reply to Togoshige]
LOL, because your assertion is not true.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:24]
In your mind, b/c someone may own 25% of masternodes, they are somehow in control, And thats not true at all, To be fully in control, to where no one could ever vote against you, you would need to own 55% of masternodes, so the other 45% could not outvote you, so that youd always have to the 10% you need to pass

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:25]
Your math is bad because only the masternodes that vote count in any proposal.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:25]
Youve gone down some weird path of this definition of yours "voting control", which doesnt make any sense

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:26]
Ugh, it makes perfect sense. You've never voted on board proposals in real life?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:26]
Do you own stocks at all?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:27]
I went along with you on your definition of "voting control" to see where it would go, and I showed a case where Rob could not have had "voting control" and you dismissed it and changed definitions again and brought up some "influence" factor, And yet you still claim he has "voting control"

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:28]
[In reply to Togoshige]
I'll give you a hypothetical. Say Rob didn't want this to pass or there's a proposal for lapdances at a strip club. He could vote his 150 NO on the proposal. He has voting control because he can bring up the result he wants on any proposal. That's voting control.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:33]
Your definition changes once again, now "voting control" is, having enough votes to sway a controversial proposal in either directoin after everyone else has voted ———— What if it were 50 Yes votes and 50 No Votes on Proposal X, does that mean anyone with 10+ masternodes would have "voting control" by your definition?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:35]
[In reply to Togoshige]
That's not an accurate example.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:36]
Its misleading to get the answer you want.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:36]
Do you agree Rob made extra 25 masternodes ~April 15?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:37]
Lets not mix the two subjects yet, Im still trying to understand your definition of "voting control", it keeps changing

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:37]
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/tx.dws?924074.htm

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:37]
[In reply to Togoshige]
😂 I'm not going for your bad example. Its not the same.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:37]
I provided a good example, and applied your current definition of "voting control", but now you claim that that is not "voting control"?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:37]
lol

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:37]
That's a terrible example. My example is actual numbers.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:38]
My question though is related about the 25 masternodes.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:38]
Bear with me.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:39]
So, the vote first-second week of April was the proposal was as NET NO.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:39]
Rob then made 25+ masternodes to get it to a NET YES

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:39]
Sun, maybe in fact, you are the one that is "misleading to get the answer you want.", I keep using your definitions and I keep proving you wrong, and you then keep changing the definition, and now you are saying my example is bad, when its a totally plausible and good example, before that you brought up some "influence" factor, how deep will you keep going to try and twist things and change things to fit your false narrative?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:41]
If it were a false narrative, then you'd have to explain why Rob reacted to  net NO on that proposal, created 25 masternodes, voted yes with them, to get to NET yes.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:42]
The blockchain has all the evidence written in plain sight for all to see.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:42]
Then why reject my previous example?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:42]
I applied the same logic and definitions that you have to that example

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:43]
"What if it were 50 Yes votes and 50 No Votes on Proposal X, does that mean anyone with 10+ masternodes would have "voting control" by your definition?"

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:43]
Alright, I'll bite.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:43]
""voting control" is, having enough votes to sway a controversial proposal in either directoin after everyone else has voted"

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:43]
150 yes/150 no.

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:44]
the 150 yes votes are from rob, and 150 no votes are from others

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:44]
25 more yes votes are from rob

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:45]
I accept your example

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:47]
So by your definition of "voting control", Rob only has "voting control" on controversial/split proposals with lots of votes? —- How often do we have split proposals like that? —-What of proposals where most vote in one direction? What of proposals where people dont really vote? —- Is there still "voting control" in those instances?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:51]
What do you think?

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:52]
look at march 2019: https://forum.biblepay.org/cc/governance/104550

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:52]
Im trying to understand your definition

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:52]
You rejected my example of 50 yes votes and 50 no votes meaning anyone with 10+ masternodes has "voting control"

sunk818, [08.05.19 13:54]
I accepted your example... I just changed it to real world examples 150 yes / 150 no, with 25 yes.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:54]
so 50 yes and 50 no could not happen in the real world?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:57]
And in your example of 150 and 150, could not another person with a high amount of masternodes change their vote or decide to vote as well?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:57]
Could not many people with a small amount of masternodes together decide to vote in one direction to chnage the vote?

Togoshige, [08.05.19 13:59]
Do the other whales not have" voting control"? Do those on the sidelines not have "voting control"? Do other groups of fish collectiveley together not have "voting control"? —- Or only "Rob" has "voting control"? With this assumed 25% of masternodes

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:00]
[In reply to Togoshige]
What's the reality vs the hypothetical. All your hypothetical obviously have a yes... do the proposals in real life bear that out? no.

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:01]
Essentially, we're stuck at total masternodes (togo) vs voting masternodes (me).

Togoshige, [08.05.19 14:06]
Youve continually been unable to define your concept of "voting control" and keep changing it ——- I proved a real world example of Rob not having "voting control" you wont accept it —— I believe your trying to push a narrative of Rob being in control of voting, when in fact he is not in control —— I believe you are spreading misinformation and misleading people

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:12]
[In reply to Togoshige]
Sorry, you've proven nothing.  If that's your opinion, you can have it. You're stuck on my "definitions" because that's seems to be the only thing you can attack. How does it feel to say to you are right? We will let the real community decide.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 14:23]
Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:23]
I just looked at the consolidation proposal, there were 424 total votes

Togoshige, [08.05.19 12:24]
Assuming like you say that Rob has 150 votes, thats 150/424 = ~35% voting power

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:31]
Yup, for BiblePay that's enough for voting control of every proposal.

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:31]
Its been a blessing because Rob never had to vote with that many, but he had to show his hands when so many NO votes appeared.

Togoshige, [08.05.19 14:35]
Sun your assuming my motives and feelings —— My goal is to increase the value of BBP, Im not sure if you share that goal —— especially with your words the past weeks given your falling out with Rob ——- Im not enjoying debating you, I feel down actually —— Ill gladly post this debate for all to see so they can make up their own minds

sunk818, [08.05.19 14:37]
[In reply to Togoshige]
My goal is to increase the value of BBP as well. Not at the cost of transparency. Honesty is so important to a project, and there's a lot of trickery going on with Rob's framing BiblePay as "decentralized community" BiblePay is.

[secoccular]

Wow, if ever a post could have used a TL;DR.

So the gist is a discussion about how many masternodes Rob controls, and how that affects voting and his power.

I think it's a fallacy to say someone needs 51% of masternodes to control the vote. That's only true if 100% of masternodes cast votes. I don't have a sanc because I have a moral issue with masternodes, but I have a hard time believing that 100% of masternode owners vote on each proposal. Does anyone know on average what percent do vote?

Even having 1% more than the combined voting power of those who vote, is enough to tip the scales. Even less than that is needed, because some people are going to vote with the dev or with which direction the proposal seems to be going.

I have no proof of anything, but my gut tells me there's something that's being hidden. The anonymity seems strange in this case. Maybe it's justified. Over time, I think less.

I think if larger investors are going to come back in, they're going to want to know what the real distribution of power is. I wouldn't dream of making more than a modest investment without knowing how the voting works in real life. I still can't decide if this is a monarch coin or not.

[togoshigekata]

I went through 50+ pages of old Rob posts and found these relevant posts:

===

Rob has some of the most experience in the space, has done the vast majority of the work, understands all the technical details, and he probably has the most time and money invested, the most skin in the game, if the project fails he loses his money

Is Rob still bound by the forces of the free market? Yes

Also, How many of you guys own Bitcoin?
How many of you guys own stocks in Amazon, Tesla, Walmart, or Facebook?

Satoshi Nakamoto owns around 10% of Bitcoin
Jeff Bezos owns 17% of Amazon
Elon Musk owns around 19% of Tesla
Walton Family owns over 50% of Walmart
Zuckerberg owns around 15-20% of Facebook

If you want voting power, put skin in the game, put your money on the line and step up to bat

===

TRUTHS THAT CANNOT BE CHANGED:

WE HAD NO PREMINE
I BOUGHT MY COINS ON THE OPEN MARKET JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE
I ONLY MINED 10% TOTAL OF MY COINS (USING 10 HOME SERVERS AND 30 VMS SERVERS) AND HAVE SCALED THAT BACK AS YOU CAN SEE IN MY STATS OVER THE LAST 60 DAYS WHILE I PROGRAM MORE
I BOUGHT THE REMAINING 90% ON THE OPEN MARKET TO START SANCS (IVE BEEN BUYING FROM DAY 1 AND STILL BUY)
I PAID FULL RATE, GENERALLY 1 SATOSHI ABOVE OR BELOW THE MARKET
THIS MEANS MY INVESTMENT IS UNDERWATER BY 50%
YES IT IS MORE THAN $150,000 INVESTED OF PERSONAL FUNDS
I DIDNT RECEIVE .01 CENT OF FREE BBP
I CONTRIBUTED EXTRA TO COMPASSION AND THE ORPHAN FUND
I PAID FOR THE HACK INTO THE POOL (BY PAYING BACK THE BALANCES - THE FEES DIDNT COVER IT)
I PAID BTC FOR THE BINANCE SCANDAL LAST YEAR

===

The free market has never been controlled by one individual, and I assert that after 5 years of existence, BiblePay will still be controlled by a disparate group of individuals with fair voting rights.  In addition, if a whale is rich enough to buy biblepay, then its their baby and they can run it into the ground or into the air if they wish.  If you think the Masternode model sucks, then you should be promoting other types of coins.  I primarily started this as a masternode coin because I agree with the governance model.  End of story - its a good model for a sanctuary economy with governance.

===

As I said I'm closer to 20-25%~ of the weight, and its my personal business if the # is fluctuating due to many personal reasons, and I'm not exadurating to hide nodes, I don't have them all set up and have unreliable hosts.  The issue with me being the most active, on this-I would say that this is one of the most important decisions steering the coin.  It's up to one who holds the status of Sanctuary to exercise his/her rights; its very important.  If they care about this coin they should most certainly jump in and vote - so this is a very weak argument.  As a matter of fact it should be spread on discord, Use your voting rights if you have them.  We should see 50% on the voting rights turn out on an important vote if its important

===

Understanding BiblePay Masternode Governance:
http://wiki.biblepay.org/UnderstandingGovernance

===

Robs publically claimed he owns 20-25% of masternodes 3 months ago

Id still like to see your analysis though Sun

I still support the masternode system and I support Rob owning whatever he owns

===

The criticisms the masternode system faces are not new, read these Dash comments:

IAMA Masternode owner who rarely votes
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/567o23/iama_masternode_owner_who_rarely_votes/

MNO voting behaviour
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/alfmn1/mno_voting_behaviour/

Best way for non-masternode DASH users to influence DASH budget proposals?
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/5ay0vl/best_way_for_nonmasternode_dash_users_to/d9mb99f

We should change voting from Masternodes to EVERYONE
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/64fuyf/we_should_change_voting_from_masternodes_to/

Will masternode voting eventually lead to Dash being controlled by the wealthy?
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/7dthw5/will_masternode_voting_eventually_lead_to_dash/

===

I disagree with sunk818 and secoccular on their view of non-voters and how it relates to control, non-voters still have control, theyre choosing not to use it and to let the proposals go the direction they are going, if they cared to change the direction of a vote, they would vote --- Any masternode owner has money on the line, why would they choose to not vote if it went against their view on how to increase the value of their money?

Masternode Owner Confession from an above link:
"I have masternodes, and I rarely vote. I run masternodes for a friend, who rarely votes. I see a lot of arguments about people upset that proposals often pass or fail with less than half of nodes voting. I dont think those people understand the reasons why so I thought I would give some insight.

Am I lazy? No.

Do I give a shit? Yes

Then why do I rarely vote?

Because I am happy with the outcome most of the time. When I do vote, it's often last minute on a proposal that's close, or risks superseding something I care about. If it doesn't meet one of the above criteria, I don't vote."

[sunk818]

Robs publically claimed he owns 20-25% of masternodes 3 months ago

Id still like to see your analysis though Sun

I still support the masternode system and I support Rob owning whatever he owns

20% to 25% sounds about right. I said 125-150 masternodes at last count. I already gave you links but you just rather argue some position then actually appreciate the analysis I've done.

I disagree with sunk818 and secoccular on their view of non-voters and how it relates to control

You can have an opinion like we do. Silly to debate opinion.

It's up to one who holds the status of Sanctuary to exercise his/her rights; its very important.  If they care about this coin they should most certainly jump in and vote in 5000 blocks - so this is a very weak argument.  As a matter of fact it should be spread on discord, Use your voting rights if you have them.  We should see 50% on the voting rights turn out on an important vote if its important .

You know, this is exactly what people did for the vote to change from 1.55M to 4.5M BBP for a masternode. You know what happened? On April 15, Rob went ahead and used 40M BBP to create more masternodes to vote with: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/tx.dws?924063.htm

So, it is quite laughable when Rob suggests masternodes vote on important issues. When they do, he will go ahead and out vote them anyway. If he really wanted to listen to the will of the community, he wouldn't pull such stunts to maintain power.

[togoshigekata]

If its silly to debate opinion, then why do you keep debating?

The data is that Rob only owns ~20-25% of masternodes, but somehow in your mind, this means he is in control

Im not sure how anyone who owns 25% of anything is in control of it?
If I own 25% of a business, am I in control of it? No

Its a silly opinion to have, and youve gone down a silly path of weird definitions to push your opinion

I believe in your mind that you cant believe that there are other people in the community who actually support proposals that Rob supports

Have you unknowingly surrounded yourself with only people that share your opinions?
Do the messages from other community members you see only represent a subset of the community?

You act as if you speak for everyone else in the community, You do not

Like Ive said before, there are many in the community who lurk, who dont talk, who are in the background, but yet you speak for them? You do not

[sunk818]

If its silly to debate opinion, then why do you keep debating?

The data is that Rob only owns ~20-25% of masternodes, but somehow in your mind, this means he is in control

Im not sure how anyone who owns 25% of anything is in control of it?
If I own 25% of a business, am I in control of it? No

Its a silly opinion to have, and youve gone down a silly path of weird definitions to push your opinion

I believe in your mind that you cant believe that there are other people in the community who actually support proposals that Rob supports

Have you unknowingly surrounded yourself with only people that share your opinions?
Do the messages from other community members you see only represent a subset of the community?

You act as if you speak for everyone else in the community, You do not

Like Ive said before, there are many in the community who lurk, who dont talk, who are in the background, but yet you speak for them? You do not

Explain where I state I speak for the community of users? There are some that share my opinion. There are others that share your opinion. No one knows the exact numbers. I don't need to re-hash the conversation you posted from Telegram. Unless there's something new you want to cover, you're just wasting both of our times.