You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: How Vote Incentivization Degrades Delegated Proof of Stake

in #dpos4 years ago

Some of the math went over my head, and I've only been here a month, so I may have missed something... But, it sure seems to me we simply need a way to insure that only voters who have never received any transfers from a given candidate can vote for that candidate, and that should any such transfers occur after the vote is registered, that the vote immediately cancels. This will slightly limit the amount of interactions here, I realize, but it may be a price well worth paying.

Maybe this is not possible, in terms of the programming...I don't know. But, we certainly do not ever want any voter receiving anything but the good service they are expecting from that witness in return for their vote...EVER. In fact, I would personally go so far as to suggest severe penatlies for anyone here who has ever participated in such behavior.

IF we are intending to truly create a "new world" here, it can not mimic the old, where hated politicians, bloated by ill-gotten gains, lord it over the rest of society, and a small class of "swamp dwellers" keeps cycling their own corrupt people into and out of offices in an ongoing cycle of "swamp protection and advancement."


Totally agree with your principles -- it would certainly be a shame, and a waste, if what we're building here starts mimicking the corrupt systems we were specifically trying to avoid.

Unfortunately it's a bit hard to precisely track payments, especially in the crypto world where round-about methods of secretly paying someone is possible. I think the best we can do at the moment is educate and inform people that, while now they can "be their own bank" and take that power back into their own hands, that power comes with the serious responsibility of which candidates they vote for to ensure the greater security of the system.

Thanks, I know I found another person I can (and will vote for ) as MY witness.

That's a shame we can't track that stuff. I guess we could at least outlaw, on here (or anywhere we may fjnd evidence of it) any published offers/suggestions or even hints that a candidate will pay, in any way, for a vote, and make that a serious flaggable offense with real consequences...

BTW...Is there any rumor that flagging will be accompanied with an ability to specifically cite the violation in question in the upcoming (or subsequent) hard forks?