You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: In the Beginning, There Was DPoS
My idea was more in the lines of not giving people SP inflation unless they use at least 50% of their slots to vote for active witnesses.
My idea was more in the lines of not giving people SP inflation unless they use at least 50% of their slots to vote for active witnesses.
I would agree with this idea as well. But I don't see why you should not force people to take part in the stability of the network. It benefits everyone and there is no downside.
I think it sets the entry barrier to high for new users. Someone who just arrived doesn't know anyone and has no stake to vote anyway. But with increasing stake there should be a financial incentive to vote for witnesses. An easy way to do this would be through the SP inflation.
Noted, it is an entry barrier. But if you accumulated or bought 1000 Steem and powered that up, I think those accounts should be able to form an opinion to set a voting proxy for 1 witness they like. Not everyone needs to make 30 vote decisions on their own. Witnesses and everyone with influence here should be more vocal about them being a possible voting proxy.
If you were allowed to vote infinite witnesses you could even set several proxies. That would make it more trustless. I might not trust 1 persons decisions, but I might trust the average among 5 people.
Can you explain this? How is this different from just upvoting the top 100 witnesses?
What is the benefit of infinite witness votes? Every witness vote has the same strength (your MVESTs) It is not like your MVESTs are divided by how much witnesses you vote.
The most important thing to defend against a hostile takeover is to guarantee overlap.
Let's assume the extreme of only 1 vote.
Assuming the community has 200kmvests to distribute, in the optimal case each of the top 20 witnesses gets 10kmvests.
However, that would be an optimal case, we know that a lot of votes will go to witnesses in the top 100 ranks and votes will be distributed unevenly.
Most likely the top 5 witnesses would have around 20kmvests and the bottom 5 more around 2-5mvests
Now anyone with some kmvests could distribute this to 4 accounts and could easily come in and elect 4 witnesses to block a hardfork.
Even worse, depending on the distribution, since there is no overlap, the person might even be able to vote in 10-11 witnesses.
So, currently with 30 votes, the community had to organize and stop voting for the 30-100 witnesses and assign their votes to the top 30 to combat the overtaking.
With infinite witness votes people could vote everyone they agree with and not just the top 30 they agree the most with.
Good point, but without being forced to vote, how can you guarantee the overlap even with infinite witness votes.
The second biggest problem besides "not enough overlap" was that most people did not use all their votes or had not voted at all. Especially some of the smaller accounts just learned recently that it is important to vote for witnesses. Ask anybody of those who didn't know that voting is important if they know what a voting proxy is and you will see that most of them have never heard about it.
Yeah, but I think that can be solved by thing I pointed out.
On top of that, it could probably be a bit more prominent in the UI and when you go to your wallet it shows in red "No witnesses voted - vote here" and in yellow "10/30 witnesses voted - complete here" or in yellow "3 inactive witnesses voted - update here".
While I hate repeating the same reply in same thread, I'm going to do it:
Additionally, you are preparing for vote buying, via return incentives, much like it happens on TRON. You may end up centralizing more with forced voting in order to contribute.
I LIKE this ^
Fantastic idea. This solves the problem of "dormant" investors too by forcing them to participate.
That would just lead to people voting for 1-15, the quickest possible path to get theirs. Without caring about the actual importance of their vote.