Hey,
A worker proposal was brought to my attention by @ppitonak within my recent "BSIP 22 - Introducing expiring votes for witnesses, committie members & proxies within the Bitshares network" Steemit thread.
@ppitonak proposed that worker proposals should be included in the vote decay mechanism (BSIP proposed that the worker proposals were out of scope), that worker proposals can last long periods of time, thus the same issues which warrant decaying vote weight for witness/committee/proxy votes are present (dead users & lost keys being permanent votes for support, etc). I fully agree now that votes applied to worker proposals should have vote weight decay applied after the committee set 'max_vote_age' is passed.
So, onto the primary reason I'm writing this post - whilst looking into the list of active workers (researching @ppitonak's stance), the active worker proposal "refund400k" (which has a length of 20 years) drew my attention & concern.
The title is "refund400k" which to me sounds like a previous worker returning over-allocated funds to the reserve pool, however it may actually burning/destroying these bitshares (entirely irrecoverable) at the rate of 400,000 BTS per day (with 131,564,159 BTS already destroyed by this point).
If this is the case, the worker proposal has an expiry date in the year 2035 .. it effectively proposes to destroy 2,628,000,000 BTS which is more than all BTS in circulation (An attack?). This is a massively deflationary proposal which I'm interested in researching further, especially since it effectively means my BTS are growing in terms of % of total available funds.
There is no supplied link within the worker proposal (unlike the other worker proposals), the only information I could find is a thread on Bitsharestalk titled "Questions about the refund400k worker proposal" in which users including bytemaster (@dan) state that the worker proposal 'refund400k' (with id 1.14.0) may have been created in error & propose new burn/refund worker proposals which consist of 4 100k refund & 4 100k burn worker proposals.
These 8 small worker proposals which Xeroc created have expired (2016-12-31), however we're still left with the "refund400k" worker proposal which still has the same id of '1.14.0', which is burning the BTS instead of really refunding the BTS to the reserve pool.
Abit posted the following information that the above command replied back in late 2015:
>>> get_object 1.14.0
get_object 1.14.0
[{
"id": "1.14.0",
"worker_account": "1.2.90742",
"work_begin_date": "2015-10-20T17:30:00",
"work_end_date": "2035-12-31T00:00:00",
"daily_pay": "40000000000",
"worker": [
0,{
"total_burned": "1742631985322"
}
],
"vote_for": "2:65",
"vote_against": "2:66",
"total_votes_for": "21716971826670",
"total_votes_against": "7192913280182",
"name": "refund400k",
"url": ""
}
EDIT:
Ok, so I've fired up the CLI wallet and run the command:
unlocked >>> get_object 1.14.0
get_object 1.14.0
[{
"id": "1.14.0",
"worker_account": "1.2.90742",
"work_begin_date": "2015-10-20T17:30:00",
"work_end_date": "2035-12-31T00:00:00",
"daily_pay": "40000000000",
"worker": [
0,{
"total_burned": "13172141776315"
}
],
"vote_for": "2:65",
"vote_against": "2:66",
"total_votes_for": "51132234796648",
"total_votes_against": 0,
"name": "refund400k",
"url": ""
}
]
Turns out it IS refunding to the reserve pool, not burning the coins! Good to hear!
Additional thread pointing out that 'worker 0 == refund' https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20793.0.html
Thanks,
@cm-steem
Don't panic.
This here:
"worker": [ 0,{ "total_burned": "13172141776315" } ],means that it's a refund worker. The '0' above refers to the worker type, and as you can see from https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/blob/master/libraries/chain/include/graphene/chain/worker_object.hpp#L95 , worker type 0 is a refund worker.
As you can also see at https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/blob/master/libraries/chain/include/graphene/chain/worker_object.hpp#L62 , the refund_worker counts its refund volume in a member called 'total_burned', which is of course misleading.
Oh, and IMO it would be nice of you if you declined the payout from this post, because you're spreading FUD...
I do not view this post as fud by any means, I do see if as a massive miscommunication in past threads though.
Worker proposals should be far more documented in the future to avoid any further confusion/miscommunication; voters shouldn't have to compile the cli wallet nor dig through code to decipher a worker proposal.
The OP has been changed to reflect the recent findings.
I dont think this was done out of FU. More so panic if anything.
CM has been doing a lot of digging around while making BSIPs for Bitshares... you guys have that in common and i yhink cm was considering a black swan revival process
To be fair, I had a good few drinks and wrote the thread up at 5/6am since I was unable to get a straight answer in telegram. Lessons learned though, no steemit after 4am or past the 4th drink haha! (Plus obviously post this kind of content to bitsharestalk instead of steem in the future).
Good catch! If the BTS are being destroyed it is effectively an ongoing share buyback, which in theory benefits all BTS holders through deflation. However, the fact that all BTS will be burned in a couple decades is a bit concerning. :)
I'd like to see this switched to a quarterly dividend; the BTS are held in the reserve fund and then paid out BTS accounts every three months.
WHY don't you contact xeroc (@chainsquad) directly and ask for clarification before you post this stuff???
Because AFAIK, refund400k wasn't created by xeroc, but by 'init0', so contacting xeroc would only confirm that his previous worker proposals have expired (which we already know). It's an active worker proposal yet is largely undocumented. All I need is for someone to run the command 'get_object 1.14.0' against the cli wallet & we can know for sure what's up.
It's a very interesting analysis of the worker proposals. It's smart to compare the responses so you can identify if a change has been made. It's funny when it's advertised as one thing but is actually something completely different. It's only through analysis like these that we can truly identify the underlying message of what's going on. Thanks for sharing! Truly remarkable.
I've compared the output of 'get_object 1.14.0' and it's identical to the output in 2015, so it's potentially burning the BTS not refunding them.. we need further confirmation! D:
I'm grateful you're looking into these issues. Thanks.
I am working toward the day I'll have sufficient understanding of Bitshares to comprehend the implications you outlined... Every day Bitshares becomes a tiny bit more clear.
Speaking for myself, it'd certainly be a positive thing when Bitshares becomes more user-friendly to average computer users and crypto noobs. Cheers
Bring on the deflation if its reasonable and leaves enough shares to maintain its value as a viable crypto token!
Increase deflation by burning steem, interesting.
So many things to learn! Thank you :)
genial
Greetings for friend steemit all ... your post is very interesting to follow .. my prayers always give success.
☺
Bitshares having a hard time?
No, this thread is simply helping me learn more about an existing worker proposal. I do not care about market fluctuations.
nice
soooo much to learn so little time :(
useful :)
@razux
Good post mate. Before reading this I have to read the earlier post first. Followed and upvoted mate. But I have very less steem power so my upvote is not worth dude. Sorry for that.
Nice 😃
makes me worry that something is not 100% right with bitshares
Why?
for the reason outlined above in writing by author - is that you ? You say that more than the value of all BTS in circulation will be destroyed . If you ask me a question please use a complete sentence, so i can determine what your asking.
Why is a sentence in itself, this is my mobile account yeah. There's no point worrying considering it would take 2 decades to happen and this thread is an information seeking activity rather than an psa.
Thanks : )
nice information, thanks
Thanks for sharing this post.
https://steemit.com/@sxeygirl