Bible Pay

Read 340 times

  • T-Mike
  • Sr. Member

    • 395


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Governance System
« on: February 27, 2018, 03:08:34 pm »
I think we need to do something about this governance system, Currently the "idea" and "cost" is on the same proposal without any knowledge if the total budget is sufficient.

I propose this in the short term:
Proposals must ask for 0 BBP on the network but you can put the actual amount you need on the forum. 3 days before the superblock, voting ends and a summary is generated on the forum. The allocation of each proposal is decided and submitted to the network 1 day before the superblock budget.

This will require the code to be changed but I think this will work much better than the current system. Let me know your thoughts on this issue.


  • T-Mike
  • Sr. Member

    • 395


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Re: Governance System
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2018, 09:06:30 am »
Rob, I don't understand why you think its funny that I want to propose a change to the governance system. I know it will take work to do it.

I don't see how the current system works for both making internal rules and budget at the same time, these needs to be 2 separate systems for an organization to run smoothly. On the last superblock you removed the faucet proposal on your own accord since you deemed it the least important, that's pretty centralized. Of course we had a chance to re-vote but that potentially changed the vote ranking for each proposal.

If you think it works the fine the way it is, then I ask that you please explain it to me. Thank you.


  • togoshigekata
  • Sr. Member

    • 345


    • 20
    • September 01, 2017, 10:21:10 am
    • USA
    more
Re: Governance System
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2018, 03:48:38 pm »
It was an unfortunate circumstance last superblock,
the pool numbers in the graph were a bit off and I think Rob was using some custom superblock code,
he had to make a quick decision or we may have missed the superblock entirely and been forced to wait another 40 days or do a hardfork,
its only been our 2nd budget of a coin that is still only 7-8 months old, with masternodes only up for 2-3 months, its been a bumpy ride 8)

Anyways, I pointed Rob in the direction of the watchman code that handles superblocks better:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.msg30505263#msg30505263
and it will handle the case when there arent enough funds to pay out every passing project, it will pay out in descending order of most yes votes

I think the system works well for budgets and will work very well with watchman


  • T-Mike
  • Sr. Member

    • 395


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Re: Governance System
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2018, 04:29:57 pm »
It was an unfortunate circumstance last superblock,
the pool numbers in the graph were a bit off and I think Rob was using some custom superblock code,
he had to make a quick decision or we may have missed the superblock entirely and been forced to wait another 40 days or do a hardfork,
its only been our 2nd budget of a coin that is still only 7-8 months old, with masternodes only up for 2-3 months, its been a bumpy ride 8)

Anyways, I pointed Rob in the direction of the watchman code that handles superblocks better:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.msg30505263#msg30505263
and it will handle the case when there arent enough funds to pay out every passing project, it will pay out in descending order of most yes votes

I think the system works well for budgets and will work very well with watchman

I think there is both a good and bad side with using the watchman algorithm. One bad thing is that proposals at the bottom won't be paid out at all. The system I'm proposing is so that there is a chance that even the last proposal on the list has a chance for possibly a partial payment. The problem is that when people vote, they are voting for the idea and not really paying attention to how much it costs. That is why in the commercial world you usually define your budget first, including what you want and the costs associated with them. Management then decided which items to approve or says no you can't spend this much for this item, you will only get this much instead.


  • togoshigekata
  • Sr. Member

    • 345


    • 20
    • September 01, 2017, 10:21:10 am
    • USA
    more
Re: Governance System
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2018, 05:23:31 pm »
I think you have good/noble intentions,

but longer term it would probably get complicated and have a huge time crunch,
start picturing when we potentially have 50-100 proposals a month to juggle/balance (tied with a most likely volatile price per coin)
how would we get everyone to agree on how much should be allocated to each proposal? in a 2 day window?

Sorting by most yes votes is a lot more simple, if a proposal doesnt make the cut, then it wasnt popular enough and the proposal owner will have to try again next cycle and potentially work on getting more support and/or adapt their proposal to fit what sanctuaries are wanting.

===

If sanctuaries are not thinking about cost when they vote, not much we can do other than attempt to educate sanctuary owners and also provide better tools (Rob has provided a bar chart at the bottom of the proposal page, and I believe we do plan to integrate Dash's governance tools)

Overall voting is the collection of various stakesholder's priorities / agendas / desires / intelligence / time commitment or lack thereof.

Some may look at cost, some may not,
Some may read the content of a proposal, some may not,
Some may give feedback/comment, some may not,
Some may vote, some may not
Some may look at all proposals, some may only look at or vote on a few.

But the driving force is that sanctuaries have money on the line, they have skin in the game,
if they make bad decisions / dont pay attention / dont contribute,
it could be a detriment to the coin and the value of their investment could go down,
so its in their best interest to be involved and to make good decisions to grow value.


  • T-Mike
  • Sr. Member

    • 395


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Re: Governance System
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2018, 08:48:09 pm »
I think you have good/noble intentions,

but longer term it would probably get complicated and have a huge time crunch,
start picturing when we potentially have 50-100 proposals a month to juggle/balance (tied with a most likely volatile price per coin)
how would we get everyone to agree on how much should be allocated to each proposal? in a 2 day window?

Sorting by most yes votes is a lot more simple, if a proposal doesnt make the cut, then it wasnt popular enough and the proposal owner will have to try again next cycle and potentially work on getting more support and/or adapt their proposal to fit what sanctuaries are wanting.

===

If sanctuaries are not thinking about cost when they vote, not much we can do other than attempt to educate sanctuary owners and also provide better tools (Rob has provided a bar chart at the bottom of the proposal page, and I believe we do plan to integrate Dash's governance tools)

Overall voting is the collection of various stakesholder's priorities / agendas / desires / intelligence / time commitment or lack thereof.

Some may look at cost, some may not,
Some may read the content of a proposal, some may not,
Some may give feedback/comment, some may not,
Some may vote, some may not
Some may look at all proposals, some may only look at or vote on a few.

But the driving force is that sanctuaries have money on the line, they have skin in the game,
if they make bad decisions / dont pay attention / dont contribute,
it could be a detriment to the coin and the value of their investment could go down,
so its in their best interest to be involved and to make good decisions to grow value.

I understand what your saying. We will see if this model hold up in the future, it is too early to tell.