First off I'm not going to address each and every point in this post as there was quite a bit of involvement and discussion already. I will say thanks for all the constructive feedback and at time criticism. You are asking real questions, which in the end is the kind of thing that we want, community involvement and honest feedback / suggestions.
And thank you for your this constructive response! I particularly appreciate that you understand and acknowledge that I am not just another troll/"FUDster" but am actually just a critical
supporter of your project. I want nothing more than for an actual "PoA" initiative (something that has been discussed in the Bitcoin community for ages but has, as yet, failed to really materialize) to form, here!
Heavy, though, is the subject of proofs. It is absolutely critical that if (when!) a working PoA model does emerge here it be logically and philosophically sound, before all else. I sincerely hope everyone on your team both understands this necessity, and takes it deeply to heart.
I would like to bring to light some of the things that are coming though.
First off, We will have a block chain. We will not exclusively rely on the masterprotocol nor the BTCitcoin blockchain (although I'm still working out the details on using the bitcoin blockchain a tiny bit [really exciting stuff happening there])
I think it may ultimately end up hindering the project some that it was launched before that block-chain was ready, but there is nothing to be done about that now. However, I think it is absolutely critical that you get this to fruition immediately. Everything else should be at a dead stop until the proof of proof of action is ready for the world. (We need to really see if the world is ready for it, and ASAP!)
We will have distributed proof with verifiable / anonymous statistics, agreed upon via decentralized consensus nodes. this chain will work within your browser via plugins for chrome / firefox or via a similar but not cloned bitcoin-qt client. This client / plugin + chain system will make cheating difficult. The algorithm will change transparently to allow for anti cheat measures.
You will want to make sure to have a stand-alone wallet. Some people avoid browser plugins either as a matter of preference or of policy. Further, browser plugins are less amenable to static analysis processes, and often carry broader assumptions over "surface area" of the system. Maintain a "K.I.S.S." version. I wasn't kidding when I said I have SMT solvers waiting for you.
In the end, I want to be able to (reasonably) easily assert something like "assuming historical growth trends continue, and the network coordinates a series of "this, that, then the other" particular action sequences, network participation should grow within the bounds of MIN% to MAX% and it will cost the network a subsidy distribution that breaks down as....."
I also want to clarify that PoA is not incentivized marketing.
Ideally, it should be "incentivized anything" right?
Our genesis was a proof of concept like has been mentioned before and the participants (Once anti cheat is taken into account) will be rewarded handsomely. Also noteworthy is that the technology used for Genesis is 3rd party and not what will ultimately power our platform.
I think it is important to clarify and educate as to the fact that this proof of concept was not a proof of the concept of proof of action. (Whew, that's a mouthful! I hope that was not too hard to follow?
) I think it is important to make sure that people understand what proof of action actually means, why it hasn't yet been demonstrated, how your average Joe can know when it has been, and what that will actually mean for his world. Not only is this critical because people now hold stake in the project, but because that will be the most direct route to introducing the value proposition to others!
An important thing to keep in mind when trying to understand or explain PoA is the quality modifiers. The participants and holders of the tokens are encouraged to upvote, judge quality, edit and contribute to the definition of what should be rewarded. @HunterMinerCrafter you would have earned a decent amount by your participation in this thread. I might even (if this were on our platform and not on a third party) tip you some of my own coin in order to make your reward larger.
Hehe. I would hope. If it works, my long-winded rants could become quite valuable some day?
I hate to even suggest it, but I can't speak for the whole so it *Might* be the case that the majority of people reward bad spelling, anti semitic remarks & overall nastiness. I doubt this will be the case and I will do my best to put the tools in the people's hands that *do* care about quality and collaboration so that their voices are heard.
My better half, in our discussions of Proz and similar initiatives, believes that It probably will become the case of overall nastiness. She feels you are likely just building a better Reddit. She says it will not be "what I would want." Time will tell, but the important and immediate concern is not that but is trying it at all. (Doing so correctly, with my SMT solver coming back SAT/UNSAT over chain constraints.)
One of the great things about working with Mastercoin is where they are in their development plan. They have been building the foundation upon which a multitude of new features are being built. We will support many of these features by default from the day of release (sometimes earlier)
...
~ 2-3 weeks PoA features deeply integrated into our platform
I think it is fine that Proz is built on Mastercoin "for now." However, Mastercoin is not Prozcoin, and those developments are independent. It is great that there is overlap in the effort and personnel, but Prozcoin needs to prove Prozcoin protocol, Master protocol is it's own thing with it's own threads of discourse elsewhere.
Again, thank you for your constructive response. I felt that I was getting nowhere with @ProzCoin and not even an indication that he understood my definition of QED. Now, at least, I have some assurance that there is at least someone on the team who might understand and admit that what has happened to date is no proof, and might start to give indication on how we are to get there. Now we just need the implementation defined and executed, so get to work!
