2nd Tier Lite Nodes

SnowHater said:
How come some group of people would get into power with less than 10% of common voting power? This is just impossible. The talk is about inclusion not about getting into power, domination or dictation.
Click to expand...

Then you need to include eveybody, including starving people in Africa. Not just some person in some country who can afford food but not a masternode. Inclusion doesn't just mean one set of people, it means everybody. I said it once already I'll say it again. Based on this logic every single person in this world should be included, we don't get to pick and choose. This is not going to happen.
 
noobtrader said:
honestly i dont mind having litenode say 100 dash but voting is weighted 0.1 vote instead of 1 vote.

otherwise the litenode can be used to attack proposal, either to kill worthy proposal or to pump garbage proposal.
Click to expand...

I fully agree. There needs to be a cap in place and voting should be fractional as well.
 
buster said:
Then you need to include eveybody, including starving people in Africa. Not just some person in some country who can afford food but not a masternode. Inclusion doesn't just mean one set of people, it means everybody. I said it once already I'll say it again. Based on this logic every single person in this world should be included, we don't get to pick and choose. This is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Every single person in this world != user (fullnode) with 999 DASH in his wallet.

splawik21 said:
After reading all the stuff here I think that UdjinM6 post gives the summary of the situation.
Click to expand...
That is true. But I'm still curious is it possible to get fractional voting without lite nodes? Smart contract, ecrow account for locking of the collateral or something like that...
 
SnowHater said:
Every single person in this world <> user (fullnode) with 999 DASH in his wallet.


That is true. But I'm still curious is it possible to get fractional voting without lite nodes? Smart contract, ecrow account for locking of the collateral or something like that...
Click to expand...

I think that would be the best way to go. I'll bet something could be developed with ethreum smart contracts and some kind of token. Will it be trustless? I have no idea I'm not a developer.
 
buster said:
Then you need to include eveybody, including starving people in Africa. Not just some person in some country who can afford food but not a masternode. Inclusion doesn't just mean one set of people, it means everybody. I said it once already I'll say it again. Based on this logic every single person in this world should be included, we don't get to pick and choose. This is not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Buster, I think you're a cool guy. I've listened to your podcasts a few times. You have a great show which has helped DASH a lot.

I think we're on the same page, if you'd just sit down to hear out the full argument here.

Idea here is not to create a socialist utopia where everyone is equal across the board. The idea is to allow more people to participate in the decentralized voting system and the revenue share model.

I think this could be achieved by fractional voting and having collateralized lite nodes with lower requirement (we already have lots of full nodes operating at a loss by the way). Think of them as stock splits which is a very capitalist method of allowing share access to more investors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
btw atm the dev are dev developing important project evolution and i dont know if this proposal should be addressed now or even if this proposal worth it...
 
noobtrader

I've watched the evolution demo the other day and have to say it's quite impressive. Certainly you'd want the devs to finish the current work for sure.

Lite nodes could increase adoption a lot I'd say, enlarge both the community and the market cap.
 
Guys, I've tried to combine initial proposal with plausible drawbacks from UdjinM6's post. But, please, help me to make it more human readable. I am not well english speaker and all.

Adding feature of fractional voting for all users

PROS:
1) DASH will be the first cryptocurrency which supports direct decentralized governance and budgeting by all its users. Ultimate inclusion, participation and addiction (better than drugs :smile:). This can lead to huge resonance in media.
2) It incentivises new users to come in the network (to buy DASH) and that leads to marketcap go up. USD Investements and rewards of masternodes, miners and developers goes up.
3) DASH developers now better know what their users (the whole community, not only MNs) really want to be implemented first, second and so on.
4) Better decision making by attracting more active people to voting, creating proposals and budgeting.
5) Developers, masternodes and miners could get more fees (rewards) in case of fractional voting for users (not for MNs) would be taxed.
6) There is pretty much no change in power balance because users should have less voting power than masternodes per 1 DASH.

CONS:
1) Voting nodes may be needed, this could lead to:
1a) low demand for voting nodes -> same price, same hosting costs for MNs, no effect on voting (i.e. completely wasted dev time)
VS
1b) high demand for voting nodes -> higher price, higher hosting costs for MNs (but could be ok because of higher prices), low effect on voting (i.e. not that bad but...)
 
InTheWoods

I don't see the right to vote as a service at all - why should they get any reward for being able to use such right?

I also don't think that having voices of "only" 500+ quite large investors is way too much centralized. Have in mind that they are not some elected or "static" persons, not a foundation or some limited "close circle" - it's just some random persons all around the world who are willing to invest quite noticeable amount of money and to provide a service in return of some reward. They basically bought a share of such service and got a right to vote for the way project is going to be developed. Again, it wasn't meant to be a voting for just voting, we aren't building electronic democracy here or anything like this where everyone has kind of a digital vote. We initially made it to give a way for "midcore" investors/shareholders to give everyone an idea what's on their mind regarding one issue or another because they play a huge role but there was no way to hear them before (see my post above).
Also, have in mind that masternoders care about their investments - they read through discussions where everyone can participate (regarding have s/he masternode or even some DASH at all or not) and do not vote blindly (hopefully :rolleyes:).

Next, as I already mentioned, voting power of lite nodes will be somewhere 10% max and imo most of the time it will be a lot lower because:
1) expenses of running node -> participating in shared masternode instead (if project goes well and proposals you like win all the time anyway - why losing a share of a profit?);
2) accumulating more and more dash -> "mutate" to masternode (more voting power + full profit).
Having this ^^^ I only see high demand for such nodes if they could became a backbone for some kind of "combined masternodes" where multiple lite nodes would somehow act as a single entity, a kind of a masternode RAID if you will. This would remove trust and would made manual shared masternode services obsolete (sorry, splawik21 :grin:). We had this idea before and discussed it a long time ago but sadly found no way to implement it so far...
 
Maybe, in future we need some other types of service nodes. But I think only masternode owners can vote is very smart.

If you really want to vote, you must show your commitment by invest more in the ecosystem. And the ecosystem only has benefit when it has best people who tie their own benefit with the long term success of the ecosystem.
 
UdjinM6 said:
InTheWoods
Next, as I already mentioned, voting power of lite nodes will be somewhere 10% max and imo most of the time it will be a lot lower because:
1) expenses of running node -> participating in shared masternode instead (if project goes well and proposals you like win all the time anyway - why losing a share of a profit?);
2) accumulating more and more dash -> "mutate" to masternode (more voting power + full profit).
Having this ^^^ I only see high demand for such nodes if they could became a backbone for some kind of "combined masternodes" where multiple lite nodes would somehow act as a single entity, a kind of a masternode RAID if you will. This would remove trust and would made manual shared masternode services obsolete (sorry, splawik21 :grin:). We had this idea before and discussed it a long time ago but sadly found no way to implement it so far...
Click to expand...

The idea of a masternode like RAID composed of multiple lite nodes is really awesome. Would be great if you could find a way to make that work.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bad idea. We should focus on what other services can our actual MN do to bring more value to Dash or some "safe and smart way" to create profit for the Owners. It would make the coin more valuable.
 
drkhouse

It's such a bad idea that the DASH devs thought about implementing it in a similar format but couldn't find a technical solution to make it happen.
 
The issue of reducing MN requirements were reviewed, not only the community but also the DEV's
There will be no decrease in the MN 1000DASH

It was settled months ago....

Find something to put ON the MN's that has a service(s) you can charge for......


if you want a MN - either SAVE your fiat or work for it......
 
InTheWoods said:
MangledBlue

:) Did you read what this thread is about? It's not about reducing MN requirements.
Click to expand...


You want to make 100DASH MN's and call them LITE MN's so they can vote and earn DASH

Why would you want to complicate things??

Get into a shared service if you don't have enough DASH for a MN
 
It's taken me 1.5 year s to get 2x MN's.....

I'm poor also.....


Buy one like everybody else......
 
MangledBlue

I don't understand people that make assumptions like that. What makes you think I'm poor and I can't afford it? I have more masternodes than you. I care about growing the project not about getting cheap masternodes for myself.

Also, getting into a shared service is not ideal because it's centralized. You would have to trust a 3rd party. Voting is also not fractional so the people involved can't share the vote. It's not a very elegant solution. There's also this issue with such arrangement https://dashtalk.org/threads/governance-question.7725/#post-79516

I agree with the devs, that a solution like this one https://dashtalk.org/threads/2nd-tier-lite-nodes.7747/page-6#post-80301 would be the best way to go.
 
As a poor person who has a share in a set of masternodes with my dad, all I can say is that I think the community should focus more on growing the network, then internal politics.

If any of you truly think up an idea like this, and think it worthy, pay the 5 DASH fee and submit the proposal.

The price will sway and masternodes are still easily attainable. I would like to ask how Masternode Service Operators distribute the vote of one MN to many customers, but other than that, the 1000 DASH limit is fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top