Since we are a company, “the board of directors” is a need, completely decentralization means low efficiency. We need to combine the merits of centralized and decentralized.
A group of signers are natually the board of directors.
2 Likes
For some topics there are already signers, who due to their (limited) discretion act as a kind of board on the behalf of NSR holders.
I’m speaking of FLOT and the liquidity operations.
Such a thing as a protocol upgrade can’t be decided by the board, as it’s the minters who need to decide this. They cast votes while minting.
Even if a board decided that the protocol from a date on where to be upgraded, a majority of shares continuing to mint on the old protocol would void that decision.
Still it’s a difference between a simple majority and 90%.
That number was chosen that high to make the network after the switch more reliable.
Such an imporant step like introducing asset voting needs broad consensus.
Better wait a bit longer and raise awareness for the duties of a BKS holder while waiting 
a really bad word for a simple trader-speculator!
No minting required for that.
yes it is. minting=profit without the need of voting or other “duties”.
We just have to implement “duties” into the profit scheme
I just dreamed up some definitions.
That’s not the simple trader-speculator; it’s the advanced trader-speculator.
The simple type just trades and speculates.
The advanced one mints to increase the gain.
The even more advanced one would mint properly to increase not only the amount of shares, but the value of the shares as well 
1 Like
What happens once 90% is reached?
The network writes into the blockchain that v4 is the official version and any client that mints with v3 will see its blocks rejected?
My understanding is that two weeks (oI guess it’s rather 20,160 blocks) after 90% are reached exactly what you wrote is the consequence of the protocol upgrade - release 3 clients (with protocol version 2) are unable to mint. Their blocks are rejected by the network.
But then what happens if the majority (say 90% if 90% is the needed percentage to pass a vote on the version) of minters shift back to v3? Well they will not be able to find blocks. So the remaing 10% (that was minting on v3 before the switch) gets control over the network. 90% of them at least mint with v3. So v3 is kept.
Well this scenario is possible but highly improbable because the 90% that pushed for v4 are economically rational.
2 Likes
+1
Well actually they will, after checking.
What happens, if after a swtich to v4, 90% of minters vote for v3?
Do we get back to v3?
I think so.
Protocol version 2 blocks (client release 3) will not be accepted after the switch to protocol version 4 (client release 4).
A downgrade is not possible this way.
You’d need a protocol 4 compatible client to vote for a protocol change.
But maybe I’m off and a developer can say how it really is.
I don’t think this is important enough to page a developer. If you think differently, do it
I think you are right. You cannot for a version per se. Your client votes automatically for its own version. So v4 clients cannot for v3 because they can only vote for v4.
I forgot that version voting is not human-drivem.
I have posted reminders to upgrade to v4.0.1 on Peercoin related channels and r/cryptocurrency. Please support these posts so they have a further reach. The upgrade process is going too slowly. I can’t imagine people funding a venture like this with hundreds of thousands of dollars and then letting it fall apart because they can’t pay enough attention to upgrade on time. Let’s get this done so we can move on to more important matters.
- https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/4doplh/reminder_all_blockshareholders_must_upgrade_to_bc/
- https://www.reddit.com/r/peercoin/comments/4dopcm/reminder_all_blockshareholders_must_upgrade_to_bc/
- https://twitter.com/PeercoinPPC/status/717870089727553536
- https://www.facebook.com/Peercoin/posts/1016790738413370
- https://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=4450.0
3 Likes
I’m serious about supporting these posts. I’m not going to be able to continuously post threads about this. Either support them now or else they’ll be gone by tomorrow and nobody will have seen them. Not even one retweet yet.
1 Like
The urgent upgrade reminder should be more visible (i.e. flashier) on the landing page on discuss.nubits.com, notwithstanding that it is nonexistant on bcexchange.org
I believe Jordan can switch to 4.0.1 right now by himeself. So I don’t worry about it.
One individual controls the network … I’d be very worried!
2 Likes
May I ask what your belief is based on?
I’m not aware of an alternative to having minters “vote for” the protocol change by minting blocks with release 4 that create protocol version 4 blocks.
And 90% of those blocks are the threshold for the protocol switch accepted by the clients.
You’d need to create an alternative client with different behaviour to get around this.
“Sorry”, there’s no central entity being able to do what you want
1 Like
In this start up period, just like BTC of 2009, I don’t care Satoshi himself control 80% hash rate in 2009, nor do I now if Jordan control the protocol upgrade.
Of course in 2018, there should be no central points for B&C.