[Passed] Motion to establish Reputed Signers Operations Team (RSOT)

Text Hash ( RIPEMD-160 )

Nowadays B&C project is in a dangerous status, Jordan Lee as a project leader has disappeared, the development fund also in danger because they are transferred into Nubit with pegging broken. The new technical leader @Sigmike has some disagreement with @Eleven who is recruited by Jordan Lee. Other developers status remains unknown. And the white paper is incomplete.

Therefore a team must be established for BKS holders in order to replace Jordan Lee’s role of project management. This group consists of 6 members elected from the eligible signers via independent motions, and they will take charge of project management such as hire/fire developers(reference technical leader’s opinion), spend development fund, crowdfunding and communicate with technical persons such as Sigmike and Eleven.

After this motion passed, Angela and Jordan should hand over the remaining development fund(NBT, BTC etc)to this group with multisignature. When this group makes a decision(4 out of 6), there will be 10 days publicity period for shareholders to veto, if no opposite motion is passed, the decision becomes valid. Generally, their group take charge of daily operation of B&C exchange company.

After this group established, they will discuss with Sigmike about the road map of B&C project as Sigmike has been elected as B&C’s technical leader. Therefore, the two big responsibilities of B&C, technical and management roles are clearly defined. Both RSOT and technical leader can NOT fire each other, both should be elected directly by shareholder via independent motions. In future, the shareholders can pass a motion to modify the member quantity of RSOT, usually the upper limit is 15 persons because of the multisignature mechanism.

RSOT is a permanent organization until B&C shareholders votes to disband it.


I agre with this in general, but I think the naming of the group could use some work. I understand the use of the word most, however it sounds strange to me when used in a group title like this. What other names can we think of?

What about we take on the naming convention of FLOT and call it the Reputed Signer Operations Team (RSOT).

1 Like

I have some questions about this group.

  • This will be formally written up as a motion correct?

  • Is it correct that reputed signers themselves have responsibilities simply by the fact they are being voted as signers, however this motion being passed would give them extra responsibility in addition to their normal role in signing operations? For example, if this passed the signers would then also act as a board of directors for B&C Exchange and make decisions on behalf of shareholders. So signers would basically have two jobs…

– Normal signing operations
– Board of director responsible for making decisions on behalf of shareholders.

Without this motion passing, signers would only take on their normal signing responsibilities without the added decision making. Shareholders have the ultimate say though and can override the board. Is my description here correct?

  • Do you plan for this board of directors to be a permanent fixture within the organization, or is it only temporary and useful while B&C is still being built? If it’s only temporary, then I think something should be added about when the group will be disbanded. If shareholders need to disband the group and their role in decision making, then say that shareholders will need to pass a motion in the future to disband the group or set an event when it will be disbanded like the exchange officially launching. Also, disbanding of the group would not effect their normal signing duties, only their additional role in decision making on behalf of shareholders.

Yes, the top 6 reputed signers have two types of responsibility, and the top 7 to 15 signer have only one signning duty.

Some people believe that building a company on Internet via block chain technology is the killer app, and block chain has evolved from pure PoW->PoS->DAO. The RSOT is a permenant orgnazition until shareholders vote to disband it.

B&C company share much similarity with real world public companies, you can also believe RSOT is an analogy of “board of directors”, but B&C has no legally representative, registered address, after all, B&C is a new innovation.

BTW, @Sentinelrv @jooize are you interested in joining this group?

I will have to catch up on this. I’ll reply when I have time. Thanks for asking!

1 Like

I unfortunately have no dedicated computer available for signing and won’t have the money available to get one for about a year. I also lack the knowledge and experience of running the client using multisig. I also don’t know enough about security and how to properly secure deposit accounts. I’m not really somebody who would be a great choice for signer, however I completely support the plan outlined here though and will vote for others who wish to become signers and are knowledgeable enough to fulfill the role.

1 Like

I think this group should be different from the reputed signers.
It is not about signing, it s about managing the funds of BCE, I believe.

That reflects the important point that

  • signers should be 1) good at maintaining servers and blockchains and signing bots and 2) honest or have collaterals. They have technical proficiency but don’t have to be full time or shareholders.
  • While managers should act timely and be good at making compromise among tasks, resources, schedule, people, and risk. The should be professional and don’t even have to own shares.
  • And shareholders should direct managers in general direction.

By making a signers managers, and letting those who have most share to vote themselves to become signers, these 3 roles are totally overloaded to one group. Te end result is unlikely to be very good, at least in the long run.

The bird who basically abandoned the whitepaper now wants to be a reputed signer, voting for himself. Not sure if this gets him to work on stuff again.

In real world, if a manager does something bad for a company, he/she will be punished or even put into prison, but in cryptoworld, nothing can be done to punish a corrupted signer, so we must demand they have some BKS.

And in real world, usually managers are paid with some shares to improve their loyalty.

please vote this now

1 Like

Can’t vote for this motion in good conscience knowing that Phoenix is in the top 2 of reputed signers.


So you prefer Jordan himself control all the dev fund rather than a team to reduce his power.

“All or nothing” is not a good way thinking.

voting still works for you guys?
at Nu it has been broken for a while

1 Like

I don’t believe Jordan/Phoenix has as much control over BlockShares as he does with NuShares.

A group of 6 signers. What would be the required number of signers to make a tx for example?

I guess only two persons can make a tx, but this thread is not relavant to make transaction, it’s about management.

@Sabreiib, this appears unlikely to pass due to the influence Phoenix will have as a top signer. I would suggest we change this from the top 6 signers to a structure similar to FLOT, where signers are individually voted into the RSOT group by shareholders. Doing it this way, we can exclude Phoenix completely and vote only for qualified people to hold the development funds and the ability to make decisions on behalf of B&C shareholders.

Each signer would need to submit a motion to join RSOT and get it passed by shareholders. I believe this is probably the best way to move forward now, seeing as how people don’t want Phoenix to have any level of control over funds. What do you think? You should prepare a motion yourself to join RSOT and others can copy your example.

1 Like

OK, I’ll edit RSOT motion and prepare another motion of joining this team, but if Phoenix’s joining motion also passed, I suggest you coopreate with the people you dislike as in real world.

This is serious besiness, not a club, even Tim Cook is not welcomed by all the directors in Apple inc.