Bible Pay

Poll

If we remove the team requirement what reward percentage should we award a non-biblepay BOINC cruncher?

Give non Biblepay teams 10%
2 (8.3%)
Give non Biblepay teams 25%
0 (0%)
Give non Biblepay teams 50%
9 (37.5%)
Give non Biblepay teams 75%
0 (0%)
Give non Biblepay teams 90%
1 (4.2%)
Give non Biblepay teams 100%
12 (50%)

Total Members Voted: 24

Voting closed: September 20, 2018, 09:49:24 am

Read 1187 times

  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 1281


    • 22
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
If the poll passes to remove the team requirement, what percentage of reward should we give to non-biblepay BOINC crunchers who fully associate their biblepay wallet with their CPID and post a valid UTXO stake for their RAC?



  • capo
  • Newbie

    • 6


    • 0
    • March 11, 2018, 07:02:14 am
    more
i think 50% will be ok if they will need to stake 20xRAC (as for now)
without staking - max 10% :)


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 1281


    • 22
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
i think 50% will be ok if they will need to stake 20xRAC (as for now)
without staking - max 10% :)

Yeah, their requirements are identical to biblepays (require utxo, no threshhold with free rac) except they are paid 50% of the reward if they are in a non-blacklisted team.  Blacklisted teams get zero.



  • 616westwarmoth
  • Full Member

    • 192


    • 16
    • September 01, 2017, 09:57:50 am
    more
While I am still hopeful the main proposal does not pass, I do think if it does we should give it as great a chance to succeed as possible.  That said, I don't think it benefits us as much to have non Team BBP members mining as my belief is they only provide a short term boost as a majority will buy to stake, then sell off the excess earnings.  So I do think we need some benefit for being on Team BBP, and think 90% feels about right.


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 1281


    • 22
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
While I am still hopeful the main proposal does not pass, I do think if it does we should give it as great a chance to succeed as possible.  That said, I don't think it benefits us as much to have non Team BBP members mining as my belief is they only provide a short term boost as a majority will buy to stake, then sell off the excess earnings.  So I do think we need some benefit for being on Team BBP, and think 90% feels about right.

Yeah, I think the new users will be more of a long term success, as long as PODC as an algorithm holds up for biblepay.

Do you mean you think we should give them 10% since this poll is for how to compensate Non Biblepay users (I assume).

Hopefully, the team requirement removal passes, since blacklisting is working in testnet, we might as well vote for the thing that has a chance in helping us grow.



  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 1281


    • 22
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Considering the current status:

Remove BOINC team requirement to participate in BiblePay
 Total Votes: 120  Votes Yes: 78 No : 40 Final: 38
 Robs Votes: Not sure, My analysis is not very good to begin with

You seem intent to make sure it passes :)
Not really, each individual sanctuary vote has equal weight (since the owner of each vote staked 1.5 million to control it) so they have every right for the vote.

Additionally, I have set up sanctuaries for people (IE people that have been to my house) and also for people that did not know how to set them up (IE the money flowed through my account).  So its also possible they are voting and you are in error.

Lastly, I don't really like spies. 

« Last Edit: September 15, 2018, 10:07:20 pm by Rob A. »


  • sunk818
  • Jr. Member

    • 97


    • 5
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 pm
    more
Your a spy, prying into something thats not your business, and a hacker.

Rob, everyone was curious why the 8.6M that was disbursed on Aug 31 and sitting there doing nothing. Then it moved to BD7FBC4HNhHZX7LrNkeobPahH3EksmKbGk on Sep 8 (http://explorer.biblepay.org:3001/tx/f9fd0a104f0df35b6f40d2a4c153b6875ab28c34b9df83ea57797c7a7a655fb5) in 1.55M chunks suggesting it was for masternodes. I forget who it was (it wasn't thesnat21), but it was discussed on BTC Talk. This is all public knowledge and supported in the block chain.

I'm surprised a great dev like yourself that is well versed in decentralized technology would call such a person a "hacker".

It is all public knowledge and easy to see by typing masternodelist on debug console.


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 1281


    • 22
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Rob, everyone was curious why the 8.6M that was disbursed on Aug 31 and sitting there doing nothing. Then it moved to BD7FBC4HNhHZX7LrNkeobPahH3EksmKbGk on Sep 8 (http://explorer.biblepay.org:3001/tx/f9fd0a104f0df35b6f40d2a4c153b6875ab28c34b9df83ea57797c7a7a655fb5) in 1.55M chunks suggesting it was for masternodes. I forget who it was (it wasn't thesnat21), but it was discussed on BTC Talk. This is all public knowledge and supported in the block chain.

I'm surprised a great dev like yourself that is well versed in decentralized technology would call such a person a "hacker".

It is all public knowledge and easy to see by typing masternodelist on debug console.

I'm confused by this post.  I know people on bitcointalk were asking why the 8.6 mil ended up creating new masternodes (since my normal operating procedure has been to borrow the bbp from myself for 3 months now, to liquidate it over a longer time frame) and then pay it back after the superblock is paid.

So that is one thing, knowing that the money was borrowed and then paid back to create new masternodes.  But that has nothing to do with trying to pry into vote records and timestamps in order to reverse engineer "who" owns other total prior MNs and how many votes are mine compared to the other participants. 

Public knowledge to see 'masternodelist'?  Of course?  No one ever said the list of MNs was not public.

The Snat, I'm not hiding anything, I'm saying its none of your business how many votes are sourced from me, and yes, your hacking activity is quite a dissapointment and reveals a lot about your character.




  • zthomasz
  • Administrator

    • 27


    • 1
    • October 30, 2017, 02:45:30 pm
    more
Rob, you are a man of integrity. From what I see, any suggestions for changing the way orphan related funds are transferred / accounted for etc are intended to improve the process and protect you/all of us from future problems.

As for the MN count, thenat21 simply accessed public data to find and disclose information about the number of MNs that you own. This in no way calls his character into question. The info has been known / assumed by the community for quite some time, but your defensive and sometimes caustic style of leadership has kept us from talking to you directly about it.

You know we respect you. We've seen God answer our prayers about taking care of the children, the orphans that we all love. You have done an incredible job, and now there are hundreds of kids who are healthier and happier than before. Most importantly, they know more about Jesus and his love for them.   

We're not perfect yet, but God is perfecting us. I trust that He will give you wisdom as you consider the impact of holding enough votes in your hand to over-ride any group decisions that might be made. 

Your vision and efforts launched this project, and now many people are involved. Our heritage of faith requires us to hold our leadership accountable. We want to see you and all of our leaders be more transparent and humbly give up some of the power you have, for the good of everyone. This will not only build trust among us as brother and sisters, it will honor the actions that our one true leader displayed when he gave up His life for ours.


  • 616westwarmoth
  • Full Member

    • 192


    • 16
    • September 01, 2017, 09:57:50 am
    more
So how do you respond in love to a disrespectful person like the snat?  Do you see that he doesnt deserve the answers?  These are not loving questions, they are attacks from a disrespectful person.

What do you mean that a miner who mined for a sanc has less voting power than an investor?  Hogwash.  I mined this coin with more than 35 servers and bought sancs on the open market.  Yes, they are both valuable for voting.

Again, you don't know that the supermajority is voting no, because you don't have an accurate vote count from me (which I established earlier).  You are now believing your lies, and I have the credibility here - Sorry, but you lost your credibility with your corrosive attitude, disrespect, and inaccurate hacking attempts.  Its not your business which masternode keys you made a mistake on, but its definitely true that more than a N number exist that I set up that are voting that appear to come from my account but arent really my sancs...  So knowing that you made an error, why dont you come clean and tell everyone the truth, that you are publicizing a lie?

(LOL, without naming names, I set a couple up for one of our directors, some for a person that is actually in this thread, and I helped someone via e-mail with a certain number, a lot has gone through my wallet, therefore you don't really know out of my N sancs how many are voting right now, you dont know.  You might be off by quite a large number !)

From the looks of the poll here, it looks like the non-Biblepay team miners want this to pass also.

The main issue I think that exists is the Sancs in question all tend to vote at the same time.  So Occam's razor would say one entity controls them all.  While it is certainly possible you run sanc's for other users (and good for you because some people have difficulty or lack of time to figure it out) and it is possible you either 1) asked them how they want to vote and they all said "yes" or 2) more likely told you to vote their sanc's with yours, the result is still the same.  It appears from normal block-chain analysis (and not any black-hat hacker activity) that you control the super majority of normally voting sancs.

I'm not asking personally how many you own, and it is your right to keep that private.  But as the lead dev of the coin, that sort of transparency would build trust in the greater crypto community.
While you are certainly within your rights to use your sanc's (and any sanc's the owners have given de facto proxy to you) how you see fit regardless of if they were bought or earned, the question of how many sanc's you control is certainly a valid one for most users.  Because in the end, if you control a supermajority, there are questions of if we have true governance.  That is not to say that anyone with the resources to buy up BBP (and now seems to be a great time) couldn't exceed what you are believed to control.  Nor is to say you haven't earned the right to call some shots.  But until the Foundation is up and running, it seems like going over and above to preserve trust would have more of a impact on the price of the coin and it's future than any feature that could be added.

In closing, the request of some in the community, and one you're free to choose what to do with, is to reduce the voting of the sanc's you control to a level where you can not pass or fail any proposal on your own.  One simple formula would be to vote with a number no more than 10% of the total sanc's, which would reduce any perceived control you have over the governance system. 

Regardless of what direction you go, know that most of the community still trusts you and are thankful for how far you've gotten this coin in such a short time.