afreer [5:12 AM]
@amanda_b_johnson the differences with Sentinel are really architectural and not easy/interesting to explain to users as they are a bridge from 12.0 towards Evo features (but not full implementing them), and Sentinel was only a part of 12.1 improvements anyway. Pre-Sentinel, governance functions were 'hard wired' into core code. Sentinel abstracts this process because in Evolution there are many Object types from Users to Accounts to Contacts etc, and if we didn't make this change first, future changes / improvements in Evolution (e.g. adding a new type of Object) would require changing core code. Now Core is agnostic to types of objects and we can take this forward for user experience and not just governance.
In terms of documentation, first thing - the whitepaper last year wasn't actually a whitepaper, not sure why it was released with that name - anyway, no, there is no whitepaper specific to Sentinel, but we have various docs for Evo in an on-going RFC process but we haven't released anything yet, but we are using them as the basis for Evo development (will release them before Evo but not quite ready yet)
In terms of 'proof of service', this is really something that's unimportant right now in Dash, and commonly misunderstood. What it means in Dash is punishing MNs that cheat some of their additional roles, not security on data added to the blockchain, as some people are claiming (who have no idea how Dash works). It's not a problem that's occurred for us (probably because there's not real reason / incentivizes are actually to help the network for your investment).