This proposal is something that can be built today with existing features. I say go for it. This doesn't require our input at all. As far as the aspects that would require a hardfork, my response to that would be, "Why should we push through a hardfork when this app could be built without it?"
Very interesting @andrarchy that you say that this proposal could be implemented with existing features.
So, if that is the case, all @jerrybanfield needs to get this moving is agreement from the top 20 witnesses for the 50% cut in their payments. Presumably they could voluntarily transfer those funds to a central account for the Budget Proposals.
Two immediate questions that come from this would be :
Who should / would / could administer the scheme?
How would the 50% witness payment "diversion" be enforced?
For the latter it could just be voluntary and the total Budget Proposal fund available each month would be adjusted according to the number of witnesses participating.
And if the community believes the whole idea is good they could vote for supporting witnesses accordingly.
Of course that swings round to the weighted voting issue. I guess getting the support of the big hitters will be all important.
It would be very interesting to take a straw poll amongst the current top 20 witnesses to see how many would support the idea...
This needs to be implemented via algorithm. It MUST NOT be implemented and distributed by human hand. Doing it this way is a recipe for disaster. The funds must be secured, distributed and allocated automatically based on up votes for each proposal via algorithm.
This proposal is something that can be built today with existing features. I say go for it. This doesn't require our input at all. As far as the aspects that would require a hardfork, my response to that would be, "Why should we push through a hardfork when this app could be built without it?"
Community Liaison, Steemit
Agreed! 🙌🏼
Very interesting @andrarchy that you say that this proposal could be implemented with existing features.
So, if that is the case, all @jerrybanfield needs to get this moving is agreement from the top 20 witnesses for the 50% cut in their payments. Presumably they could voluntarily transfer those funds to a central account for the Budget Proposals.
Two immediate questions that come from this would be :
For the latter it could just be voluntary and the total Budget Proposal fund available each month would be adjusted according to the number of witnesses participating.
And if the community believes the whole idea is good they could vote for supporting witnesses accordingly.
Of course that swings round to the weighted voting issue. I guess getting the support of the big hitters will be all important.
It would be very interesting to take a straw poll amongst the current top 20 witnesses to see how many would support the idea...
This needs to be implemented via algorithm. It MUST NOT be implemented and distributed by human hand. Doing it this way is a recipe for disaster. The funds must be secured, distributed and allocated automatically based on up votes for each proposal via algorithm.
Agreed on all counts.
I was just playing with the devil's avocados whilst pushing my tongue in to the side of my mouth 😉
Maybe someone should ask the top 20 witnesses...
Heh, so, "unholy, guacamole!" :D
Your witnesses is your strengh to vote up
By Communist means, apparently...
Yep.