danielle
Pivian
Cryptosi
Apr '17
Representative Voting Nodes
This is an amendment to Presstabs Governance proposal,
Full Disclosure: This amendment has been written solely by myself (CryptoSI), I am a PIVX Masternode holder and I do intend to vote during this process, though it is not to be assumed that I will vote for my own proposal(s). I reserve the right to make further proposals and amendments to other proposals. I am not a developer so my proposals will need to pass a feasibility test even if they are successful during Masternode voting.
Before reading this amendment it is assumed that the reader has read and understands the masternode system, PoS and Presstabs governance proposal as this builds on those 3 pre-requisites.
My main focus with this amendment is firstly to reduce voter apathy and secondly to increase community interaction and education on proposals.
Presstabs Proposal is to create a third type of node within the PIVX system, this Voting node is what I wish to use as the representative layer within the governance system. I am proposing that the rewards that a voting node receives are linked directly to the amount of support a voting node has from stakers.
Stakers should be able to vote for free by supporting a particular voting node, It’s down to the holders of the voting node to spread awareness of themselves and their voting intentions and get stakers to back them. Stakers should NOT be rewarded for backing a voting node. Whether or not they can still stake the coins used for backing is open to discussion, but at this point I would suggest that staking be allowed.
To clarify; Stakers will be delegating their voting power on ALL proposals during that superblock, they can withdraw their support at any time, and will be able to spread their coins as they see fit amongst varying voting nodes. 60PIV here, 200PIV there.
Another difference with this compared to Presstabs original vision, is that a proposal will pass with a consensus gathered from combining the votes of all 3 layers, and having over 50% ‘YES’ votes. Masternodes votes will have a weight of 10K each and staking votes should have a weight of 0.75, with voting nodes votes weighted at 0.85. This gives a small incentive to vote via voting node.
Support given to a particular voting node will not be public information. Nor will the total amount of support any voting node has. Not even the owner of that voting node should be privy to that information, if obscuring this information proves impossible then some measures should be taken to mitigate this, else it could just become a popularity contest.
FAQ:
Where will the reward come from?
I think the reward should come from both the proposal fees and the voting fee that stakers may have to pay to vote, should they decide not to use a voting node, alternatively it could come from stakers and masternodes rewards with another see-saw as presstab has eluded to, although I’m not a fan of this as it lowers an already low interest rate.
Would a Voting nodes decisions on proposals be public knowledge?
YES, all voting nodes decisions should be made public knowledge both before and after the creation of the superblock, when a voting node changes its mind on a particular proposal it should be easily seen in real time, via a website.
Can voting nodes stake the 100PIV used to setup the voting node?
NO
Should PIVX be valued at $10 then would the collateral to setup a voting node decrease?
I think it should drop to 10PIV if this happens, but this is beyond the scope of this proposal and should be discussed in Presstabs original proposal.
Will stakers need to chose a voting node for each individual proposal?
No stakers will choose a voting node or nodes for each superblock and each node will decide on ALL proposals during that time. A staker can leave their voting balance with a voting node for as long as they like.
Why will this work?
I feel incentivising a layer to gather votes in a certain direction will encourage people to communicate with the community, engage and educate them on the content of proposals. It will also allow Pivians to place their voting power with a certain voting node, be they an individual or group of people sharing a node that have a vision for the coin that resonates with them. It will reduce voter apathy, by not making voters have to learn the intricate details of every single proposal. Hopefully given time there will become a development of well respected and popular members who advise and debate the merits of proposals.
Obvious problems.
Or email me directly – [email protected]
PIV long and prosper!
Apr '17
Representative Voting Nodes
This is an amendment to Presstabs Governance proposal,
Full Disclosure: This amendment has been written solely by myself (CryptoSI), I am a PIVX Masternode holder and I do intend to vote during this process, though it is not to be assumed that I will vote for my own proposal(s). I reserve the right to make further proposals and amendments to other proposals. I am not a developer so my proposals will need to pass a feasibility test even if they are successful during Masternode voting.
Before reading this amendment it is assumed that the reader has read and understands the masternode system, PoS and Presstabs governance proposal as this builds on those 3 pre-requisites.
My main focus with this amendment is firstly to reduce voter apathy and secondly to increase community interaction and education on proposals.
Presstabs Proposal is to create a third type of node within the PIVX system, this Voting node is what I wish to use as the representative layer within the governance system. I am proposing that the rewards that a voting node receives are linked directly to the amount of support a voting node has from stakers.
Stakers should be able to vote for free by supporting a particular voting node, It’s down to the holders of the voting node to spread awareness of themselves and their voting intentions and get stakers to back them. Stakers should NOT be rewarded for backing a voting node. Whether or not they can still stake the coins used for backing is open to discussion, but at this point I would suggest that staking be allowed.
To clarify; Stakers will be delegating their voting power on ALL proposals during that superblock, they can withdraw their support at any time, and will be able to spread their coins as they see fit amongst varying voting nodes. 60PIV here, 200PIV there.
Another difference with this compared to Presstabs original vision, is that a proposal will pass with a consensus gathered from combining the votes of all 3 layers, and having over 50% ‘YES’ votes. Masternodes votes will have a weight of 10K each and staking votes should have a weight of 0.75, with voting nodes votes weighted at 0.85. This gives a small incentive to vote via voting node.
Support given to a particular voting node will not be public information. Nor will the total amount of support any voting node has. Not even the owner of that voting node should be privy to that information, if obscuring this information proves impossible then some measures should be taken to mitigate this, else it could just become a popularity contest.
FAQ:
Where will the reward come from?
I think the reward should come from both the proposal fees and the voting fee that stakers may have to pay to vote, should they decide not to use a voting node, alternatively it could come from stakers and masternodes rewards with another see-saw as presstab has eluded to, although I’m not a fan of this as it lowers an already low interest rate.
Would a Voting nodes decisions on proposals be public knowledge?
YES, all voting nodes decisions should be made public knowledge both before and after the creation of the superblock, when a voting node changes its mind on a particular proposal it should be easily seen in real time, via a website.
Can voting nodes stake the 100PIV used to setup the voting node?
NO
Should PIVX be valued at $10 then would the collateral to setup a voting node decrease?
I think it should drop to 10PIV if this happens, but this is beyond the scope of this proposal and should be discussed in Presstabs original proposal.
Will stakers need to chose a voting node for each individual proposal?
No stakers will choose a voting node or nodes for each superblock and each node will decide on ALL proposals during that time. A staker can leave their voting balance with a voting node for as long as they like.
Why will this work?
I feel incentivising a layer to gather votes in a certain direction will encourage people to communicate with the community, engage and educate them on the content of proposals. It will also allow Pivians to place their voting power with a certain voting node, be they an individual or group of people sharing a node that have a vision for the coin that resonates with them. It will reduce voter apathy, by not making voters have to learn the intricate details of every single proposal. Hopefully given time there will become a development of well respected and popular members who advise and debate the merits of proposals.
Obvious problems.
- Without an large incentive to place votes with voting nodes many people will probably not bother, but at least it solves the problem of paying to vote. Plus I believe that having slightly higher weighted votes will be enough to see a reduction of voter apathy to some degree.
- Piv being delegated for voting will have to be locked at the moment of superblock creation, this is not easy to calculate so there will be time when plenty of piv is locked for pretty much no reason, which will slow coin velocity.
- This may turn into a simple popularity contest, with popular commentators being able to gain mass support for their own proposals, although this is probably a problem to a lesser degree without the voting layer
- I have no idea if this is possible to implement, In theory It should be difficult but not impossible.
Or email me directly – [email protected]
PIV long and prosper!