BiblePay-Removing the BOINC Team Requirement for possible future Sustainability

[talisman]

I think the problem is the BBP users that are power mining are the least likely to care less about the stats.  So they are the ones more likely to cheat the system, and they also have the most to gain, they are also the ones most likely to jump to GRC to improve their ROI (they'll have the time and incentive to figure it out) by double dipping if the Team Requirement is eliminated.

So if user BBP (and I'm not trying to sully this user and claim they would do this with 100% certainty) broke up their fleet of machines into 300 separate users, they then could field roughly 18 new Sanctuaries, which would be a very positive increase in ROI and certainly worth the hassle.  Or worse, suddenly have 28M BBP for sale, and destroy the current price wall.

Basically, anyone with enough incentive to cheat the system is going to be very tempted.  And if 8 of the top 10 suddenly starts breaking things up to stay under the cap, then the bulk of the staked BBP will be free to flow into either Sanctuaries (reducing their yield for everyone else) or to the market (putting even more downward pressure on the price).

In the end, the issue is, and again, I point to Byteball, I'd wager any BBP person doing Byteball at WCG is not following their development nor do they (with very few exceptions) care about that coin, other than it would be nicer if it was higher priced so they could make more when they sell.  But I'll wager none of our team has bought any sizable quantity of Byteball due to their introduction to it (so they've not become added value investors) and more likely than not are selling putting downward pressure on that coin.  My fear is opening the team requirement will only serve to add profit takers to our ranks, and revamping the staking is not as necessary as it once might have been due to BBPPool.

Dear All,

Here is the executive summary of what I will say: "I strongly second to what West says."

Here is the content for more curious:

I came over to BBP from Gridcoin. Used to crunch about 3-4% of the project credits then with all my CPUs and GPUs dedicated to Boinc. I might say I was in that community (silently) since my day 2 of crypto mining. I like the idea of earning crypto through distributed computing since we are helping science and not simply burning power and crunching crypto puzzles. Then again, GRC profitability fell deeply in Feb-March and I started seeking for alternatives. This was about the time you were switching over to PoDC, Made my math, converted some of my coins for collateral, and been following the development since then. I actually feel even better than in GRC times, since this project also benefits orphans on top of helping scientists. I consider that double-dipping in the sense of being good and giving.

I am not a Christian, yet I believe Jesus is a prophet. I am not sharing pro-Trump sentiments, but -believe it or not- when I see on the wallet that someone is requesting prayers for their loved ones' healing, I do pray for them. This , I think, is a third way of good this coin is doing. God is Love, for anyone and anything.

See, I am both an investor and believer in PART of the causes of this coin. With all sincerity, I am asking you guys not to lift the stake requirement. First thing you will see then is, people dismantling accounts to release the coins required for staking. I know I will do. All my machines are home-built and home-maintained, and reformatting everything and starting to crunch Boinc under a new account takes approx. 90 minutes per machine. Then I will start double-dipping with GRC. Hard to believe there aren't other computer-savvy guys that will do the same. Now, I do not have an intention if that happens to sell all my coins and go away (will probably setup masternodes with the released coins), but there is no telling what these other guys will do (dumping, OMG!!).

As a summary, lifting the team requirement will not hurt us, but lifting the stake requirement may turn fatal.

I wished to remain a silent member of this community, but now I see the future of the orphans and my investment are at stake, and decided to drop my bit on the table.

I believe what will push this project beyond the limits of the bear market and provide long-term growth is adoption by the ordinary people (shoppers, or donators that do not even need to maintain a wallet and know the internals of the algorithm - not the miners).

I have been tinkering about a real-world use case that would enable shopping with certain cryptocoins with extra discount (BBP may be one of them), that has potential to increase adoption rate and thus create demand for the favored coins. Will let you know if it ever flies.

Best Regards, and Vaya con Dios

[Rob Andrews]

Maybe we should consider doing one thing at a time and keeping the UTXO requirement but remove the team only for now.

I'll update the proposal to reflect removing the team only, but leaving in the UTXO.

This way as people come over from BOINC, they will have to buy BBP to mine.

[T-Mike]

Difficult thing is that BBP already supports 300 orphans although size and performance of the projects is way to small for this size of support. Now a miracle (strong philanthropist investor or strong crypto bull market) is needed to keep them supported.

Yes, I think we should try getting some philanthropists involved and that in turn will hopefully allow us to run marketing campaigns.

I suppose if we just allow double dipping it will be ok, doesn't seem like Gridcoin's stats are helping them in any way. The whole stat thing I believe is just for generating a want for higher RAC and making it into a competition so that you would want to rise in rank and beat others. Of course that's not the case for everyone and most of the smaller users probably don't even care about the stats.

[togoshigekata]

"The only thing so far I dont like about the proposal is what West mentioned about 'double dipping'.  I never did like that possibility.  We could offer the ability to create a spork that contains a string of blacklisted team numbers (and I mean in no way any disrespect to the teams, this is precisely to prevent double dipping).  Any team that is alerted on the forum of paying in another crypto for the same work could be added to the key (IE blacklisted) and that would prevent double dipping, except where other coins like BiblePay do not require a team.   Another words:  users who are part of a blacklisted team are not compensated in bbp." -Rob

References:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.msg44919797#msg44919797
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.msg44931180#msg44931180

Is a team blacklist feature part of this proposal?
and do we have a list of teams to start off on the blacklist?

[sunk818]

This proposal feels a bit rushed and keeps changing based on discussion on BTC Talk. Its not clear what the proposal actually is for now and what changes will occur if the proposal changes. Should production proposals even be allowed to be revised? If so, revision history (like git commits) seem important so we know what changes are made and change yes/no votes accordingly.

[capo]

is double dipping so bad? i think this could be one of most attractive features of our coin

[klondike]

wait......if will be blocking GRC will be blocking BYTEBALL?  noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo .....

[jaapgvk]

So, just to make sure. Currently this proposal is now only for removal of the team-requirement. This will also involve blacklisting some teams (e.g. Gridcoin) and giving a penalty if you are not in team BiblePay (e.g. 50%).