What will be paid to B&C exchange developer

[Nagalim]

We could also give sigmike and eleven a bunch of bks that they will start minting with, thereby decreasing the apathetic %.

[Sabreiib]

Nushareholders can help B&C by minting on v5.0, after all, 40% BKS in their hands.

I guess B&C is their biggest hope, if Nu fails.

[Sabreiib]

You will follow Sigmike if the motion passed, after v5.0 released, I’ll draft that motion to elect Sigmike as technical leader.

[crypto_coiner]

Voting for a new leader that would replace Jordan via the Nu blockchain voting mechanism he invented would be…the most beautiful way for him to pass the baton.

I think that is a must –
First of all, there is no leader per se unless we are defining and even provisioning its role in a motion.

[crypto_coiner]

A team like @crypto_coiner, @cryptog and myself could handle payments and recruitment. I’m sure there are other who could qualify. Haven’t asked any of them yet. Question is what’s in it for such a team, as it takes time and there are risks?

Absolutely IN.
Tasks include Recruiting, Promotion, Evangelism.
Payments possible in NBT, BKC, NSR and BKS

[crypto_coiner]

And more importantly it reveals an important lack of knowledge of the blockchain process from @Eleven

As it is rather a subjective statement, that requires some elaboration and exposure to all shareholders.

[Sabreiib]

Can we vote a reputed signers team after V5.0?

A dozen of reputed signers are the best for payment, recruiting, promotion, Evangelism.

In a crisis, we can see more clearly who is more responsible and kindness.

BTW, if B&C succeeds, I suggest we take a portion of revenue as foundation multi-sig by reputed signers, to pay for the software development and promotion etc. So @sigmike @eleven @CoinGame @ben etc you may work part time or full time for many years, if you wish. B&C can be the first profitable DAO, sustainable development!

We are together to run a business from all over the world, we are on same boat, our community is definitely different from those hype alt coins.

[sigmike]

Who is the “BCexchange” account in bitcointalk?

I don’t know. Maybe @tomjoad does.

Could Sigmike post a reply on bitcointalk forum that all shareholders need to upgrade to v5.0 with 55% threshold?

I could but I only have very few posts on bitcointalk so people may not trust me.

Hi sigmike could add your comments on my code, point to where I am wrong. It will be good for the 5.0 release and me also shareholders.

Sure I will, but it will take some time so it didn’t look like highest priority.

Please don’t make a so quick decision.

Ultimately it’s shareholder’s decision to upgrade or not. They have to decide whether they want a quick 5.0 that only forks out non upgraded clients, or a full 5.0 that requires more time and development, that would also enable abstention and data feeds upgrade alerts.

Knowing that abstention can be added later in a future protocol upgrade, and data feed upgrade alerts can be added in a non-protocol upgrade.

Yes I agree with you option that will make fork and results some complicated thing. But as you know that time you and jordan always has different opinions. I just follow one leader and drive the project move forward.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. Jordan and I indeed had disagreements about the data feeds (not about abstention, after we discussed it). You were right to follow Jordan and I’m not saying we should rewrite it the way I’d have done it. I’m just saying it still needs work. But since my main criticism was that is was overly complex, I’m not certain we can finish it quickly.

As it is rather a subjective statement, that requires some elaboration and exposure to all shareholders.

The major problem is that he determines whether a block is abstaining or not by reading a global flag inside the minting code, whereas he should do it by parsing blocks when they are received. It means the application was seen like it was a single autonomous node that would create all the blocks. That’s why I think it’s an important lack of knowledge of how the blockchain works in the code.

Can we vote a reputed signers team after V5.0?

Yes, voting for reputed signers was part of 4.0. It was just never enabled because the protocol never switched.

[Sabreiib]

Ultimately it’s shareholder’s decision to upgrade or not. They have to decide whether they want a quick 5.0 that only forks out non upgraded clients, or a full 5.0 that requires more time and development, that would also enable abstention and data feeds upgrade alerts.

Something like egg vs chicken, nowadays around 30%+ miners are apathetic, so we need ban them at first and let active miners efficiently pass motions.

We should not get stuck here, let’s move on, but I guess @sigmike need to talk with Jordan(if possible) and update B&C website download link, bitcointalk forum.

[Sabreiib]

A motion which receives a vote in 5001 out of any 10000 consecutive blocks and the majority of share days (coin days) in those 10000 consecutive blocks is considered passed.

Well, if @sigmike is not against within 24 hours, I’ll draft a motion to elect sigmike as B&C technical leader.

[Dhume]

I’m currently very caught up in some real life stuff don’t have time to read and reply but I will read everything and reply at length tomorrow! I feel a consensus about the path to take is starting to develop I will post a draft in accordance with what I think are the right steps to take forward in accordance with consensus.

[Eleven]

I’m just saying it still needs work. But since my main criticism was that is was overly complex, I’m not certain we can finish it quickly.

I agree with.

The major problem is that he determines whether a block is abstaining or not by reading a global flag inside the minting code, whereas he should do it by parsing blocks when they are received. It means the application was seen like it was a single autonomous node that would create all the blocks

I think i did not make the low-level mistake. I added a fAbstention flag in blockindex class not just use global flag. So every node can get the block abstention state, not just mining nodes. I know the logic of solving the abstention part is complicated, I will review.

[Sabreiib]

I know the logic of solving the abstention part is complicated, I will review.

If this feature is really hard to impletment, I suggest we avoid it. In this situation, lack of dev fund, we need simple&direcrly solutions to bring B&C into operation ASAP. Advanced features can be added in future when B&C begin to receive revenue.

I guess when CCEDK reopen, the BKS price will drop because quite some BKS investors are losing faith, and it’s hard for us to fund more for B&C project unless we upgrade software to demonstrate dev team are working well.

Centralization and decentralization certainly have pros and cons respectively, I suggest when 12-15 reputed signers are elected, a desision making mechansim in emergency situation can be:

After a decision made by reputed signers, and accompany objection motion is automatically created with hash codes, there will be 2 weeks for shareholders to vote for this objection motion. Signers will move on if this objection motion not passed.

Apathetic shareholders aren’t deserved to be respected, they should be controlled by more professional/active members.

In an extremely emergency situation just like the DAO stolen event, the reputed signers can act without shareholders’ permission, if the latter facts prove they are right, they are guiltless, if they are wrong, just resign.

[mhps]

If this feature is really hard to impletment, I suggest we avoid it. In this situation, lack of dev fund, we need simple&direcrly solutions to bring B&C into operation ASAP. Advanced features can be added in future when B&C begin to receive revenue.

I agree. Make small and frequent steps. Discover problems early when the consequence is not severe.

[Sentinelrv]

By the way, why would Angela mention sigmike as a new leader?

I think that maybe Jordan feels his reputation has been damaged and that it would be in the best interest of B&C Exchange for BlockShareholders to move on without him by selecting a new project lead. This statement from Angela (most likely Jordan) seems to suggest that he endorses Sigmike as his replacement without him having to post it here himself.

[Sabreiib]

I still respect Jordan even after Sigmike elected as new leader.

After all, Jordan has made so much effort on these projects.

[Sabreiib]

@backpacker, I remember that you talked with sigmike about the Mac OS version “deterministic” issue, could you solve this?

If not, I’ll install Linux on my PC, because I dislike windows for too much virus.

[cryptog]

Ultimately it’s shareholder’s decision to upgrade or not. They have to decide whether they want a quick 5.0 that only forks out non upgraded clients, or a full 5.0 that requires more time and development, that would also enable abstention and data feeds upgrade alerts.

How much time do you think it would take to fully review the 5.0 code made by @Eleven and do the release?

Also, once 5.0 is released, whether it contains abstention and default data feed or not, I guess all the trading mechanism remains to be implemented before B&C is completed.

How much time do you think, @sigmike and @Eleven, it will take to get the completion?

[Sentinelrv]

If this feature is really hard to impletment, I suggest we avoid it. In this situation, lack of dev fund, we need simple&direcrly solutions to bring B&C into operation ASAP. Advanced features can be added in future when B&C begin to receive revenue.

I agree. Make small and frequent steps. Discover problems early when the consequence is not severe.

I agree as well. Including abstentions into the protocol is an important feature for apathetic voting, however I believe we can survive and pass grants without it by cutting out non-upgraded clients. We can include abstentions later on. Non-vital features like this should be excluded until we are able to pay for their inclusion from revenue made off of BKC sales, otherwise we will be paying for them through BKS dilution.

[Sabreiib]

I am waiting for @Dhume reply and prepare for the motion for sigmike.