mage00000
Member
The title of this thread may (or may not) momentarily confuse you, so let me clearify.
There are a lot of people who would like to get more involved with Dash but simply can not put down 1000 Dash for a masternode. The general idea that dash ownership = a say in the project's development is very attractive but the height of this threshold is a quick disillusion for most.
Some already have joined forces with contracts etc to set up a "shared masternode", but wouldn't it be great if this could be done on the Dash blockchain instead of wasting money on 3rd parties (lawyers)?
Now some functionality of Masternodes may be hard to create in a shared way, but other functions and especially the voting mechanism can relatively easily be achieved in a different way.
Introducing the wallet wallet.
The blockchain now stores wallets that contain dash (dash wallets), but I think it is not a very complicated thing to implement wallets that contain other wallets (wallet wallets) provided that a wallet can only be included in 1 other wallet.
A simple example may (or may not) clarify this idea, (if not post your questions below)
Suppose I have 100 Dash and my friend has 900, so together we have 1000. We could then agree to create a wallet that contains my wallet and his wallet. This wallet can not send money, it is only an administrative object.
Note that I maintain full ownership of my wallet and my friend of his, yet we have created a wallet that has a 1000 Dash value and thus could be given a vote in the voting mechanism.
In cases where we both have the same opinion this is very trivial but when we have a different opinion this should result in a partial "Yes" or partial "No".
If I vote "Yes" and my friend votes "No" this would result in a 1/10 Yes-vote and a 9/10 No, based on our contribution in the wallet wallet.
Well, this is just a brain fart that I was suffering from recently, so I thought I will just share it here. If unusable in this way, perhaps there are other uses conceivable? Share your thoughts....
Perhaps a different name such as super wallet or hyper wallet would be less confusing (but also less fun )
Ernst.
There are a lot of people who would like to get more involved with Dash but simply can not put down 1000 Dash for a masternode. The general idea that dash ownership = a say in the project's development is very attractive but the height of this threshold is a quick disillusion for most.
Some already have joined forces with contracts etc to set up a "shared masternode", but wouldn't it be great if this could be done on the Dash blockchain instead of wasting money on 3rd parties (lawyers)?
Now some functionality of Masternodes may be hard to create in a shared way, but other functions and especially the voting mechanism can relatively easily be achieved in a different way.
Introducing the wallet wallet.
The blockchain now stores wallets that contain dash (dash wallets), but I think it is not a very complicated thing to implement wallets that contain other wallets (wallet wallets) provided that a wallet can only be included in 1 other wallet.
A simple example may (or may not) clarify this idea, (if not post your questions below)
Suppose I have 100 Dash and my friend has 900, so together we have 1000. We could then agree to create a wallet that contains my wallet and his wallet. This wallet can not send money, it is only an administrative object.
Note that I maintain full ownership of my wallet and my friend of his, yet we have created a wallet that has a 1000 Dash value and thus could be given a vote in the voting mechanism.
In cases where we both have the same opinion this is very trivial but when we have a different opinion this should result in a partial "Yes" or partial "No".
If I vote "Yes" and my friend votes "No" this would result in a 1/10 Yes-vote and a 9/10 No, based on our contribution in the wallet wallet.
Well, this is just a brain fart that I was suffering from recently, so I thought I will just share it here. If unusable in this way, perhaps there are other uses conceivable? Share your thoughts....
Perhaps a different name such as super wallet or hyper wallet would be less confusing (but also less fun )
Ernst.