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

[cryptog]

I must acknowledge that after 2 months since the peg failure, I am rather convinced by the liquidity engine model of @Phoenix .
The recovery of the peg with no reserves at all is a good example of it.
The avenues for revenues …there are infinite models once we have a good peg.
I think @Phoenix is right in saying that we can dilute nushares to raise money.
Look at all these crypto projects that have no real value proposition whatsoever (I still believe that the crypto projects that are the real deals are only Nu and B&C)…and yet they raise like 4000 btc…with nothing but vapoware…
It is clear that we cannot apply the traditional view of business to the crypto world.

So let us stop arguing on who was the cause of the peg failure in May.
Shareholders are responsible, period, including FLOT, @JordanLee , @Phoenix (i suppose he was a shareholder before the failure) and the rest.
And let us move on.
It is a waste of time to argue on that.

We must acknowledge that @Phoenix (and @jooize) is doing a great job in restoring the peg and @Phoenix must recognize that shareholders who entrusted FLOT are responsible for the peg failure.

[cryptog]

By the way, RSOT is diffrent from FLOT in nature.
I strongly support RSOT.

[Sabreiib]

It seems Phoenix’s reputation support on B&C decreases these days, and RSOT motion is about to pass. Near 49% ratio now. If it is passed, phoenix has to hand over the dev fund(in NSR/NBT) to reputed signers as a group.

[Sentinelrv]

It seems Phoenix’s reputation support on B&C decreases these days, and RSOT motion is about to pass. Near 49% ratio now. If it is passed, phoenix has to hand over the dev fund(in NSR/NBT) to reputed signers as a group.

I didn’t realize it was that close. What happens if it passes then? I see no point continuing development on a network that Phoenix has infected.

[Sabreiib]

There are quite some sole BKS investors and the dev fund is about 100,000 USD? We need dev fund.

[Financisto]

And we need it back in something that still holds some value (i.e. BTC).

No dev fund in NSR…

[dysconnect]

If JL’s shares get removed and there’s an updated white paper I’d be willing to chip in something in return for extra BKS. As I understand there’s some deviation from the original design. @phoenix if you don’t want to get kicked out you should at least answer some questions.

[backpacker]

this motion has passed, lets create a multisig shall we?

[Sabreiib]

Motion passed, BKS holders, let’s talk about how to foward.

[Sentinelrv]

@Phoenix, since this motion has now passed, will you comply with B&C Law and hand over the funds once we have a multisig group?

[Sentinelrv]

If JL’s shares get removed

Is this actually possible to do? If so, then Augeas can be the stable currency and B&C shareholders can burn Jordan’s shares and completely remove his influence from the network. It is too late to do that with Nu, which is why a new blockchain was necessary. As long as his shares are part of this network, I consider it dead on arrival, which is one of the reasons why I was advocating for Augeas to become a replacement for B&C.

[Dhume]

Jordan might have more shares in B&C then the intial 30% due to him having a large ammount of NSR (as demonstrated by Pheonix’s voting power).

[Sentinelrv]

Jordan might have more shares in B&C then the intial 30% due to him having a large ammount of NSR (as demonstrated by Pheonix’s voting power).

He obviously doesn’t have over 51% though, since this motion passed. What was the minimum percentage of shares @sigmike said was needed for a hard fork?

I added my 2,000 shares to this motion last night, which is probably why it passed so quickly.

[Sentinelrv]

Motion passed, BKS holders, let’s talk about how to foward.

We need to get this moving. Who will be part of the multisig team? We can’t take the dev funds from Phoenix without a multisig group. Once these people are voted in, we can really see if Phoenix cares about laws passed by motion.

[mhps]

i don’t mind being a signer if signing is less often than once a week.

[Sabreiib]

You may draft a motion so we can vote, I’ll prepare mine. I guess daily operation/decision is less than once a week.

[Cybnate]

i don’t mind being a signer if signing is less often than once a week.

Having the 2nd highest reputation according to the B&C client, I like to also volunteer as long as signing occurs less than once a week. Fine to discuss operations on a daily bases if needed though.

Edit: My proposal posted here: [Passed] Motion to join RSOT - @Cybnate

[mhps]

You may draft a motion so we can vote

@Cybnate reminded me that I already have a motion under voting .

[Sabreiib]

cd6300…? Remember it, I’ve been voting for your motion for a long time.

I suggest BKS holders to vote for mhps, he has done a lot for our community.

[sigmike]

What was the minimum percentage of shares @sigmike said was needed for a hard fork?

What do you mean?

50+% of the minting shares (and some development) are required to make you the sole block creator in the main chain (by ignoring other’s blocks). Then you can do anything that would require more than 50% since you now have 100%. But there are not many things that require more than 50%. And since this is based on the minting shares there’s the possibility that some dormant shares awake and make the other chain takeover. But I’m not sure this has anything to do with your question.