Voting for default data feed providers

Providers. There will be at least 4 default providers. Probably more, as i intend on throwing my hat in the ring. They will be chosen stochastically each time the client is downloaded.


I don’t know. To me being a datafeed proovider means haviing to read and really try to understand every motion and proposals in time, then read followup posts and come up own decisions. That is a lot of effort given the amount of complex / overlapping motions we have. That is the main reason I don’t apply for anyway.

That just provides a test for datafeed providers: every new motion gives a test question at the end and every datafeed provider send his/her answer by PM to a test manager who knows the correct answer from the author. Those feed providers who got a lot of wrong answers get low grades.

1 Like

Just like to say that this is certainly not my main driver, although a nice perk of the job. My key driver is ensuring a healthy ecosystem by providing shareholder support and setting an example and making it easier to own NuShares 24/7 when you are not 24/7 following all the discussions. When there are more than 5 datafeeds, I would consider withdrawing mine enabling me to have a bit more focus instead of having my attention spread out widely.


Data feed providers can save a lot of LAZY shareholders time.

1 Like

How would it work if you wanted or even needed to withdraw? Would a new version of the client need to be released, removing you as a default feed and moving other shareholders that are subscribed onto a different feed?

There should probably be a way for data feed providers to exit without requiring a new version release, removing them as an option. Like maybe the feed provider could enter in some setting, which triggers a pop up window in all subscribed clients letting them know that they need to select a new feed provider from the list because the one they are currently subscribed to is retiring.

The list would need to be able to auto-update as well. Maybe the setting you entered in above also triggers the removal of you as an option in everyone’s clients. I don’t know. I’m just trying to give ideas to the dev team so they can figure something out.

The simple answer would be:
implement frequency voting instead of default data feeds.
But I suppose implementing frequency voting is more complicated than implementing default data feeds.

1 Like

Can data feeds and frequency voting coexist?

Oh very much so. Frequency voting would allow you to subscribe to multiple data feeds at once. Also, you can let it find datafeeds that agree with the votes you manually set and partially subscribe the them automatically.

I could argue that data feeds are one of the best use cases for frequency voting. It’s like what JL is doing with the stochastic client downloads, but instead doing it every time someone mints a block.


When a datafeed retires it’s percentage of default installations would naturally lower to close to zero as soon as shareholders stop voting for it. So a retired datafeed wouldn’t be installed on new clients at least.
I agree it would be good to have a way to remove a datafeed, but to prevent abuse or undesired centralisation of power it will probably need to be by motion votes.

Here, you can find my application for being a default feed provider, btw.

1 Like

The voting is a one off thing. Dead data feeds are indeed a serious issue for this kind of hard coding of the providers.

1 Like

@crypto_coiner, @Nagalim, will you be applying as well?


1 Like

An idea: by default the wallet votes for any motion/grant that 2/3 or more of available feeds vote for. Weighting can still be used. Nu needs to make sure available default feeds are independent and reputable.
Or put the urls in nu.conf and update it in the distribution tar file when default feeds change. This might not be compatible with current design that feeds are stored in the wallet.

True. We will have the software check that a data feed gives a response before assigning it as a default data feed.

There are some other options as well that I will look at to mitigate the issue. Some may make sense for later releases.

@crypto_coiner just wanted to make sure you aware that voting for default data feeds begins in a little over a day if you wish to advance a motion to be considered as a default data provider. Looks like we already have motions from Cybnate, cryptog and masterOfDisaster.

1 Like

Thanks for the reminding, yes.

1 Like

Also, I will be going on vacation soon and won’t have access to my laptop to add anymore data feed motions. If anybody else is going to join in, please do so soon so I can add you in before I leave. I’m hoping @Nagalim decides to join in as well.

Hi, @Cybnate, @Cryptog, @crypto_coiner, @masterOfDisaster, is it convenient to provide your motion hash for default data feed provider, data feed url, signature url and signature address. I need collect these informations for the default feed install. Also anyone who want to be the default data feed provider could post their information here. How many candidates for the default data feed providers will be better, so far we have four? Right?

1 Like

I’m working on getting a feed going as well. I should have a definitive answer for myself by tomorrow.

1 Like

I was wondering, would it also be possible to get a “default” data feed that is an average of the other “default” data feeds. So say 3 out of the 4 vote in favor of a proposal this datafeed would then also vote for the proposal. Say 1 out of 4 vote in favor of the proposal the “average” data feed would then also abstain voting in favor of the proposal. This would be a nice option for shareholders who are unsure which datafeed to pick but still want automated voting as they would in essence vote in conjuncture with the majority of the data feeds thus guaranteeing only supporting motions for which there is good consensus among feed providers.

It would also help with giving the feed providers more voting power without that power going to a single feed/provider.