moli
Well-known member
Key #1 if you want to know what Evan or any dev said last (except crowning, i can't see her posts from her profile page), follow them by checking on their posts, like this: https://dashtalk.org/members/eduffield.104/
Development Update - June 2, 2015
- Thread starter eduffield
- Start date
The problem is trying to take what he still wants to keep from the initial description and over ride what we want from the update. I am having a really hard time putting it together into one contiguous thought.
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
Fashionably late to the party again, very busy these days! My eyeballs enjoyed the pleasure of reading that tremendous update, can't wait to test it and then see it in action. You know when eduffield maintains radio silence for a while, something big is coming down the pipe!
Here's to a successful #DGBB and Version 12!
Cheers,
Tao.
Here's to a successful #DGBB and Version 12!
Cheers,
Tao.
Ok i'm replying to myself cause nobody else is filling us in so they must not know either. I think this is sort of how it is happening. Almost need a beer just to process this comment...
crowning said this:
I'm not exactly happy that we change the Dash emission rate, and I've never been a friend of "super-blocks", however I see that this is a reasonable compromise to make most Masternode owners happy.
The general public WILL be confused because there's additional Dash made out of nothing, inflation critics will show up etc...
It makes me quite happy that YOU are the one to explain this :tongue:
Minotaur said this:
This is not how I am understanding the system, what I am gathering is the reward goes down for a period of time... so the emission briefly slows down... and then when the time to vote comes... the system prints a super block to fund the projects but there is not additional money created is just the portion that the network did not create while on the slower emission... and after that super block then the emission catches up and matches the current emission curve so that there is no change on emission or additional inflation... The advantage this way is there is no need for an escrow account or for money sitting idle, but I dont think there is any additional money created.... Now take this with a grain of salt, as I have not confirmed with the developers... but is just how I read the announcement.
Sorry if this is glaringly obvious for some but I don't think it is for others and the explanation should be right when it goes out so I really want to update things.
So we are approaching the end of the month and their are some proposals up for voting. As we approach those blocks we start carving off 10% of the masternode's current share of each block? By carving off I mean we stop paying it (essentially not generating those new funds holding them back). It is then these funds that are used when the super block would be generated to be able to pay the proposals. Now I guess these funds at the time of the super block just get mapped basically proposal funds deposited to proposal address. Anywhere close to right?
Last edited by a moderator:
JGCMiner
Active member
This is my understand based on Evan's comments in that thread and the first post in this thread.
1. The block reward will be permanently reduced to 90% of its current value. This for all blocks (other than the superblocks) for all time. MNs will eventually get 60% of this 90% and miners 40%.
2. At the end of the month the MNs would have voted on some projects and prioritized the ones that were approved.
3. If the total cost of funding all approved projects is <10% of the current block reward then that exact amount is generated in a superblock and payed directly to the individual projects. The difference between 10% and the actual amount needed to fund all approved projects is NEVER generated. Thus in this case, compared to current expected number of minted coins -- LESS coins are minted.
4. If the total cost of funding all approved projects is >10% of the current block reward then the top X number of projects are funded based on the priority set by the MNs. Then exactly 10% is generated in the superblock and payed directly to the individual projects. Thus is this case, the total number of coins minted is UNCHANGED compared to the current expectation.
1. The block reward will be permanently reduced to 90% of its current value. This for all blocks (other than the superblocks) for all time. MNs will eventually get 60% of this 90% and miners 40%.
2. At the end of the month the MNs would have voted on some projects and prioritized the ones that were approved.
3. If the total cost of funding all approved projects is <10% of the current block reward then that exact amount is generated in a superblock and payed directly to the individual projects. The difference between 10% and the actual amount needed to fund all approved projects is NEVER generated. Thus in this case, compared to current expected number of minted coins -- LESS coins are minted.
4. If the total cost of funding all approved projects is >10% of the current block reward then the top X number of projects are funded based on the priority set by the MNs. Then exactly 10% is generated in the superblock and payed directly to the individual projects. Thus is this case, the total number of coins minted is UNCHANGED compared to the current expectation.
The multisig account was not the pork barrel, it was just an additional risk. The pork barrel is alive and well, as any proposal with a single vote could still get into the funding queue if the 10% total budget is otherwise unallocated.
There's no minimum approval threshold at all, just more votes = higher funding priority.
JGCMiner
Active member
Although it hasn't been explicitly stated I am under the assumption that he meant that things would be ordered in terms of yes votes if and only if the proposal had achieved a simple majority....
In any event, I am sure a minimum threshold of some sort will be added as allowing things with 1 vote or even 5 votes to make the list is rather absurd.
Last edited by a moderator:
darkstrike420
Active member
What are they?
Some are already there
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/commit/6e229e16ff0ddac5c98c49a6e772d572239d3d2c
some are not yet merged, WIP
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/347
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/348
camosoul
Well-known member
Is that you, Shooter McGavin?
camosoul
Well-known member
I've harped about it enough. There comes a point where you just have to admit that some people want to shoot themselves in the foot so badly that letting them learn the hard way is the only useful application of your time and efforts.
Let the fuckups reap it.
Can someone from the dev team please clear this doubt and kill the pork barrel ghost once and for all?
Is this confirmed to be true?
So the 10% is ALWAYS going to go to proposals that have the most "YES" votes?
What if all proposals suck? What is the point of a "NO" vote?
Won't people with the most masternodes just vote themselves more money? So basically, if you own 51% of all the masternodes you can vote to receive 100% of the proposal funds since it is impossible for another proposal to have more YES votes aka MOB RULE.
Can someone please reiterate exactly how proposals are elected since this would determine if I should continue or not with supporting this project.
JGCMiner
Active member
It is very likely NOT true as it would defeat the entire purpose of setting up a governance system (which the devs have obviously spent a lot of time coding to bring about) if a single vote out of 2600 could award a project money. That just makes no sense, and I am pretty sure Evan has done enough to prove that he is not that foolish. Anyway, let just wait for him to respond...
Nobody owns 51% of the masternodes. And what you call mob rule is more frequently known as "democracy."
Calling eduffield it would be nice to get some clarification on the few points left over here. We are trying to make sure when this is all written about in the press we have it right an honestly there is still some confusion among core members who have been in the discussion all along so I think we need some official word just to clarify things. I'm still waiting for some clarification that JGCMiner had a legit reply after mine about the 10% block reward.
A purely democratic system never has worked and never will. There is a reason why the USA was founded as a constitutional republic and became a shining beacon to all the world until the yeast in government rose. Nor does the word democracy ever appear in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence. A pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" Ben Franklin
“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” Thomas Jefferson
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” John Adams
If Evan is trying to push Dash towards a purely democratic governance, I will fight tooth and nail against it.
Last edited by a moderator: