Forum Home
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular

    Poll FTC richclub - bad or good idea

    Feathercoin Discussion
    10
    67
    9901
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • MrWyrm
      MrWyrm administrators last edited by

      If the ‘plan’ has been tweaked, the poll is now meaningless.

      Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M
        mirrax last edited by

        If the ‘plan’ has been tweaked, the poll is now meaningless.

        So is eating of Carolina Reaper :)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • kris_davison
          kris_davison last edited by

          No its just a discussion. Which formed after concerns were raised about the original idea. Its an agile process - challenge -> discuss -> refine -> repeat

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • MrWyrm
            MrWyrm administrators last edited by

            So is eating of Carolina Reaper :)

            What I mean is, if there is a ‘plan B’, it might be a plan for the voting to reflect the improved options. Some of the ‘bad’ voters may wish to move their votes.

            P.S, have you ever eaten a Reaper?

            Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              panoramix Regular Member last edited by

              How about we build a decentralised voting system into the wallet where regardless of the amount of ftc you hold in that address, the weighting of your vote remains the same.
              …
              The idea is that everyone can vote by % of sacrifice from the address.

              The big unaddressed problem of bitcoin is centralization of hashing. To truly address it, we would need a proof of human identity, which cannot be mathematical. I don’t know how to solve it, but without it, your suggestion won’t work. True ACP decentralization is also impossible without it.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • P
                panoramix Regular Member last edited by

                Although maybe we should rename it to “FTC Investors Club”…

                Sorry to nitpick, FTC is not a stock, it is a currency. You do not invest in it, you save it.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • MrWyrm
                  MrWyrm administrators last edited by

                  Pano, I agree with this. To have anonymity means that the creation of multiple identities is possible, which makes the trust issue tricky.

                  Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M
                    mirrax last edited by

                    What I mean is, if there is a ‘plan B’, it might be a plan for the voting to reflect the improved options. Some of the ‘bad’ voters may wish to move their votes.

                    P.S, have you ever eaten a Reaper?

                    Not yet :)

                    If we evolve the original idea we can make completely new poll later.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • MrWyrm
                      MrWyrm administrators last edited by

                      The big question is, do we need physical human identities or do we just need some sort of cryptographic measure of trust. A digital identity with an unfalsifiable ‘rating’ could increase trust without the need to share identity with people. The digital citizen’s ID ratings could be ruined by running a scam. How you’d keep this from being falsified is tricky. But in my mind, the incentive of losing your ‘reputation’ is strong glue in the real world that prevents people from acting out of character, there might be a way to emulate this for digital cititzens.

                      Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • MrWyrm
                        MrWyrm administrators last edited by

                        Not yet :)

                        If we evolve the original idea we can make completely new poll later.

                        Plan.

                        I’ve not eaten anything quite that hot either. TBH, a habanero is a horrendous enough experience raw.

                        Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • kris_davison
                          kris_davison last edited by

                          I don’t mean we invest “in” FTC we invest “with” FTC.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • P
                            panoramix Regular Member last edited by

                            The big question is, do we need physical human identities or do we just need some sort of cryptographic measure of trust. A digital identity with an unfalsifiable ‘rating’ could increase trust without the need to share identity with people. The digital citizen’s ID ratings could be ruined by running a scam. How you’d keep this from being falsified is tricky. But in my mind, the incentive of losing your ‘reputation’ is strong glue in the real world that prevents people from acting out of character, there might be a way to emulate this for digital cititzens.

                            Considering the needs of ACP decentralization, we would need a “proof” of autonomous personhood. (Real mathematical proof of this is impossible.) Once identified, we would assume that private keys of persons prove their autonomous participation. Decentralized ACP would have to be rewarded, which would also provide the answer to future Neoscrypt ASICs. White market will provide identity checking an pairing of persons with wallets.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              slavco Regular Member last edited by

                              Based on the discussion I think that development and features need to be driven by comunity and developers.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • M
                                mirrax last edited by

                                Based on the discussion I think that development and features need to be driven by comunity and developers.

                                Sure, but the development cost something (i.e. ACP - 10BTC? for Sunny, GPU miner - 1,5BTC? for Andre…)

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • MrWyrm
                                  MrWyrm administrators last edited by

                                  I agree that there needs to be a way to monetise things.

                                  Like what I do: 6uuy6isbrW1SBF191Bzgui1gWxPdNKx2PB

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • S
                                    slavco Regular Member last edited by

                                    This means we don’t have dev. community if there is need to buy features and tools… As I know another coins have their own dev. teams that invest in coin in order to increase value of their property…

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • S
                                      slavco Regular Member last edited by

                                      I’m thinking about investing with development but here I have seen a lot of good projects that are idle now and were always on the second place because some “nice” reads or scam operations took their place…
                                      But really isn’t time to speak about the past it will be good to focus on the feature and learn from mistakes

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • P
                                        panoramix Regular Member last edited by

                                        … focus on the feature and learn from mistakes

                                        you said a mouthful there

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • lizhi
                                          lizhi last edited by

                                          I hope Developers should hold 100K FTC and the other team members should hold 50K FTC. :)

                                          We go to heaven or go to hell

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ?
                                            A Former User last edited by

                                            I refuse to hold greater than 25k ftc. Plain and simple. Untill I leave my role as team/staff, I don’t want to have any conflict of interest.

                                            I have me reason’s but I have no qualms with other team members holding any amount they want.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post