Jump to content

[Discussion] Foundation Definitions and Rules Proposal

Started By RTMoney , May 25 2015 09:48 PM

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#16

RTMoney
  • RTMoney
  • Crypto Veteran
  • MEMBER
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,513 posts
  • 28 topics
    • Time Online: 32d 20h 23m 29s

CM I am not sure how this will work in the future. Now it might be possible to interact with people through the forum who have 51% of the shares but once the GRC get spread it will be hard.
Imagine you would need to interact with people holding 51% of BTC. I cant imagine that.


Not 51 percent of all shares, but rather 51 percent of all eligible shares. Those who have not staked within the last 6 months would not be eligible, exchanges and foundation coins would not be eligible.

Non participation of eligible votes should be viewed as a veto against the poll.

At the moment, polls aren't being discussed or posted outside of the client (not in cct/twitter/reddit/irc) yet are being considered valid with a fraction of the eligible voting weight (in fact 3 participants = a valid poll currently).

If 51 percent is too high, would you propose a lower percent?
Yea I agree this line of thought needs more work, I don't know the solution and I don't know if 51% is achievable but I am thinking about it and what ways we can make this "codeable" and transparent.
  • 0

Cryptocointalk.com doesn't endorse any ads. Warning: ads my be illegal or untrustworthy in your jurisdiction. Advertising Here.

#17

Quez
  • Quez
  • Crypto Veteran
  • MEMBER
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,821 posts
  • 17 topics
    • Time Online: 83d 6h 43m 2s
  • Country:Germany

What about prompting a user when installing a client whether he wants to participate in votes in general. If not, all the the GRC in this wallet become non-eligible until the user re-activates them in the config.

If the user decides to participate in a vote the GRC have to be re-activated before the vote started.

 

In addition to that GRC could become non-eligible if a user did not participate in a single vote in the last X votes or Y weeks. Something like that.

 

Thats how we can filter out the "I dont care" users and probablly reach 51% of the shares much easier. In that case, 51% seem reasonable.


  • 1

#18

Frank0051
  • Frank0051
  • New Member
  • MEMBER
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • 0 topics
    • Time Online: 1h 30m 11s

Is there a place to learn about what was the outcome of all of this? I've read through about 7 threads in the last 3 hours and I see a lot of stuff sort of ends in mid 2015. I also looked at the 10th block in the block explorer and tried to see where all the coins left after burn went but it kind of went all over the place.

 

More curious than anything else. I've been using GRCs for about 2 months and I'm fascinated with organizational network questions like these.

 

P.S. Is it possible the date in the vote explorer is incorrect? They are all showing 5/20/2016. 

http://www.gridresearchcorp.com/gridcoin/?result&t=Polls


  • 0

#19

traderman
  • traderman
  • Crypto Veteran
  • MEMBER
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,922 posts
  • 40 topics
    • Time Online: 33d 10h 44m 30s

The dates seem fine to me.

 

Is there a place to learn about what was the outcome of all of this? I've read through about 7 threads in the last 3 hours and I see a lot of stuff sort of ends in mid 2015. I also looked at the 10th block in the block explorer and tried to see where all the coins left after burn went but it kind of went all over the place.

 

More curious than anything else. I've been using GRCs for about 2 months and I'm fascinated with organizational network questions like these.

 

P.S. Is it possible the date in the vote explorer is incorrect? They are all showing 5/20/2016. 

http://www.gridresearchcorp.com/gridcoin/?result&t=Polls


  • 0

#20

RTMoney
  • RTMoney
  • Crypto Veteran
  • MEMBER
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,513 posts
  • 28 topics
    • Time Online: 32d 20h 23m 29s

The dates seem fine to me.

Is there a place to learn about what was the outcome of all of this? I've read through about 7 threads in the last 3 hours and I see a lot of stuff sort of ends in mid 2015. I also looked at the 10th block in the block explorer and tried to see where all the coins left after burn went but it kind of went all over the place.

More curious than anything else. I've been using GRCs for about 2 months and I'm fascinated with organizational network questions like these.

P.S. Is it possible the date in the vote explorer is incorrect? They are all showing 5/20/2016.
http://www.gridresearchcorp.com/gridcoin/?result&t=Polls

Only because I fixed a few bugs... pulling votes from the blockchain directly now instead of going through the rpc, there were some issues that had to be fixed with the change and this was posted before I finished the transition.

previously an advertisement from my mobile phone overlords, now just an obnoxious message to let you know I posted this from my mobile.
  • 0

#21

hollenh0
  • hollenh0
  • New Member
  • MEMBER
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • 1 topics
    • Time Online: 19h 29m 52s

 

CM I am not sure how this will work in the future. Now it might be possible to interact with people through the forum who have 51% of the shares but once the GRC get spread it will be hard.
Imagine you would need to interact with people holding 51% of BTC. I cant imagine that.


Not 51 percent of all shares, but rather 51 percent of all eligible shares. Those who have not staked within the last 6 months would not be eligible, exchanges and foundation coins would not be eligible.

Non participation of eligible votes should be viewed as a veto against the poll.

At the moment, polls aren't being discussed or posted outside of the client (not in cct/twitter/reddit/irc) yet are being considered valid with a fraction of the eligible voting weight (in fact 3 participants = a valid poll currently).

If 51 percent is too high, would you propose a lower percent?

 

 

What about setting a certain amount of Gridcoin (ie. 1000 GRC) to be able to vote?  This would be similar to Dash's system of only letting Masternodes vote.


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Google (1)