path: root/bb/c26b1c2ed9f8d24b0f49ee5be2bd5e5beae2d3

Return-Path: <teekhan42@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6143BF5
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2017 18:20:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ua0-f170.google.com (mail-ua0-f170.google.com
	[209.85.217.170])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5384D1FF
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2017 18:20:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 35so19792396uak.1
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 03 Feb 2017 10:20:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; 
	bh=YjF7gK4cnM6zGANlCJLTYXM4hucMtt+HdZWoPXcGX3I=;
	b=ittXZmUIjnMG6NWxC1Qrba+VEYwRyq6lw+OaAL6XhoJXECX2wfx7Z+4cUFYQURu1Ls
	gFuGYU83Vf6VX9prdUrj2vOAxcDxfNhWC1+sjnbHbX06OFoaiog5DiusDmWGlmNljio3
	4ASLakP0RcCgznr6/xf2QgEHmFJkCjw0qY1FYExI5CbmEfau1W0VfYrE8eb7Hi6xk1XQ
	yTGFBaE4KsoIjw9hDA37y1yLrn0ZhhszhIhoLA3XNslzuyCC7acFxWtYwL8JO/a2+yph
	0AlUTtSPNM7WmlytHgogsPy7VpUoaO1usQtMpUlvU7ApbKsUgKKnUEvuJNdD2gVv6X9W
	4Rew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to;
	bh=YjF7gK4cnM6zGANlCJLTYXM4hucMtt+HdZWoPXcGX3I=;
	b=QfN38shXWLmH1xKFg7k9u8jEiXtRpJ1surDOMWWGkvSNniVqIZNjKQiZ3xKJy7mUs0
	WPeVhjWdE7NPdjUWwIsiatDw1Yzop9EE8ts72pYqeDEfaeY+AUQw0B/vPEuPue7r/QyR
	8lphF5iIULCsCb/RliuwnO9SWU3ARzW4LG321Ru1cxwYK1pi/wCPgvjhO2wPeDYXq1uP
	sfe/qpQVRZfbhDhMHaDaJglQmRag9jAQG6dEIGX0OINspGl7SW825mAYiUM01OB9HN4q
	SVUgTpDdYULZVeDQGLtjrOrPvlxrvuIc7bEILeQHnenQhDMbEYdpiW7zaYOO0FuVLjxQ
	OT8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXK6zfOMhVoWV7S3oiu5cfzjOA515WVoTDMlek5OawLcWit2KFw+rhUb2+dii1BY8VolajOF8amuEvFg7g==
X-Received: by 10.176.91.214 with SMTP id z22mr6094923uae.135.1486146014462;
	Fri, 03 Feb 2017 10:20:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.49.77 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:20:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMBsKS9Jmah6jc-pYNNOmJSJS+mHSJ9PchWnQ=BixX0C-hg4ig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGCNRJqNg9-aYG62OxTz5RJyx+JJkx-kt2odooZWs92f5teZiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<201702030024.10232.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAGLBAhdzPOC6MppMyuL6SwnoY_D829ZRs78pTF47k3rnHPjE1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMBsKS9Jmah6jc-pYNNOmJSJS+mHSJ9PchWnQ=BixX0C-hg4ig@mail.gmail.com>
From: "t. khan" <teekhan42@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:20:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGCNRJpgvoyjKR8RcsOacWD0YboVK+enFPEV+heXFZp9Svau_A@mail.gmail.com>
To: alp alp <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045f8cd646caa60547a455b6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
	RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:23:56 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Community Consensus Voting System
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:20:17 -0000

--f403045f8cd646caa60547a455b6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Most of these are answered in the BIP, but for clarity:

>Who decides on which companies are eligible?
Preferably no one decides. The company would have to exist prior to the
vote, and would need a public-facing website. In the event of contested
votes (meaning someone finds evidence of a fake company), the admin could
investigate and post results.

>Is there some kind of centralized database that one registers?
No.

>Who administers this?
I don't know. I'm happy to volunteer, if no one else wants to be
responsible for it. The only task would be adding the confirmed votes to
each respective BIP. From there, everything's public and can be confirmed
by everyone.

>What is to stop someone from creating a million fake companies to sway the
voting?
The logistics of doing that prevent it. But let's say 10 fake companies ...
first, you'd need to register ten domain names, host and customize the
website, all before the vote and in a way that no one would notice.

>How does a company make it's vote?
Someone at the company sends a very small transaction to the BIP's vote
address. Someone at the company then posts what the vote was and its
transaction ID on the company's blog/twitter, etc., and then emails the URL
to the administrator.

>How does one verify that the person voting on behalf of a company is
actually the correct person?
They post it on their company blog.

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:19 AM, alp alp via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> This proposal seems hopelessly broken.
>
> Who decides on which companies are eligible?  Is there some kind of
> centralized database that one registers?  Who administers this?  What is =
to
> stop someone from creating a million fake companies to sway the voting?
> How does a company make it's vote?  How does one verify that the person
> voting on behalf of a company is actually the correct person?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> There are two ideas here for "on-chain" voting, both of which require
>> changes to the software.  I agree with David that on-chain solutions
>> complicate things.  Both proposals can be effected without any software
>> changes:
>>
>> Those who wish to use proof of stake can provide a service for making
>> vanity addresses containing some indicator of the proposal to be support=
ed
>> - 1bigblock or 12mbblk or whatever - based on a supporter-provided secre=
t
>> key, and then supporters can move their bitcoin into their own vanity
>> address and then whoever wants to can create a website to display the
>> matching addresses and explain that this is the financial power in the
>> hands of supporters and how to add your "financial power vote."
>>
>> Those who simply want to "buy votes" can use their funds in marketing
>> efforts to promote the proposal they support.
>>
>> This second method, of course, can be abused.  The first actually
>> requires people to control bitcoin in order to represent support.  Count=
ing
>> actual, real people is still a technology in its infancy, and I don't th=
ink
>> I want to see it progress much. People are not units, but individuals, a=
nd
>> their value only becomes correlated to their net worth after they've bee=
n
>> alive for many years, and even then, some of the best people have died
>> paupers. If bitcoin-discuss got more traffic, I think this discussion wo=
uld
>> be better had on that list.
>>
>> notplato
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Strongly disagree with buying "votes", or portraying open standards as =
a
>>> voting process. Also, this depends on address reuse, so it's
>>> fundamentally
>>> flawed in design.
>>>
>>> Some way for people to express their support weighed by coins (without
>>> losing/spending them), and possibly weighed by running a full node, mig=
ht
>>> still be desirable. The most straightforward way to do this is to suppo=
rt
>>> message signatures somehow (ideally without using the same pubkey as
>>> spending), and some [inherently unreliable, but perhaps useful if the
>>> community "colludes" to not-cheat] way to sign with ones' full node.
>>>
>>> Note also that the BIP process already has BIP Comments for leaving
>>> textual
>>> opinions on the BIP unrelated to stake. See BIP 2 for details on that.
>>>
>>> Luke
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 02, 2017 7:39:51 PM t. khan via bitcoin-dev wrote=
:
>>> > Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > - t.k.
>>> >
>>> > ----------------------
>>> > BIP: ?
>>> > Layer: Process
>>> > Title: Community Consensus Voting System
>>> > Author: t.khan <teekhan42@gmail.com>
>>> > Comments-Summary: No comments yet.
>>> > Comments-URI: TBD
>>> > Status: Draft
>>> > Type: Standards Track
>>> > Created: 2017-02-02
>>> > License: BSD-2
>>> > Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDGDTmZvkE5Uuwh8  (just an example,
>>> don=E2=80=99t
>>> > send to this!)
>>> >
>>> > Abstract
>>> > Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS) will allow developers to
>>> measure
>>> > support for BIPs prior to implementation.
>>> >
>>> > Motivation
>>> > We currently have no way of measuring consensus for potential changes
>>> to
>>> > the Bitcoin protocol. This is especially problematic for controversia=
l
>>> > changes such as the max block size limit. As a result, we have many
>>> > proposed solutions but no clear direction.
>>> >
>>> > Also, due to our lack of ability to measure consensus, there is a
>>> general
>>> > feeling among many in the community that developers aren=E2=80=99t li=
stening to
>>> > their concerns. This is a valid complaint, as it=E2=80=99s not possib=
le to
>>> listen
>>> > to thousands of voices all shouting different things in a crowded
>>> > room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the Bitcoin community today.
>>> >
>>> > The CCVS will allow the general public, miners, companies using
>>> Bitcoin,
>>> > and developers to vote for their preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99=
s public
>>> and
>>> > relatively difficult (expensive) to manipulate.
>>> >
>>> > Specification
>>> > Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is
>>> added
>>> > to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by
>>> > sending a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP's address.
>>> Each
>>> > transaction counts as 1 vote.
>>> >
>>> > Confirmed Vote Multiplier:
>>> > Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core
>>> maintainers/contributors
>>> > are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is worth 10,000=
x
>>> a
>>> > regular vote.
>>> >
>>> > For example:
>>> >
>>> > Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then states
>>> publicly
>>> > (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails the URL
>>> to the
>>> > admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will count as
>>> 10,000
>>> > votes.
>>> >
>>> > Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitFury, etc., all do the same.
>>> >
>>> > Confirmed votes would be added to a new section in each respective BI=
P
>>> as a
>>> > public record.
>>> >
>>> > Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a particular
>>> block
>>> > number is mined.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Rationale
>>> > Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twofold; it gives =
a
>>> > larger voice to organizations and the people who will have to do the
>>> work
>>> > to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will negate t=
he
>>> > effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedly.
>>> >
>>> > Definitions
>>> > Miner: any individual or organization that has mined at least one val=
id
>>> > block in the last 2016 blocks.
>>> >
>>> > Company using Bitcoin: any organization using Bitcoin for financial,
>>> asset
>>> > or other purposes, with either under development and released
>>> solutions.
>>> >
>>> > Developer: any individual who has or had commit access, and any
>>> individual
>>> > who has authored a BIP
>>> >
>>> > Unresolved Issues
>>> > Node voting: It would be desirable for any full node running an
>>> up-to-date
>>> > blockchain to also be able to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But
>>> as
>>> > this would require code changes, it is outside the scope of this BIP.
>>> >
>>> > Copyright
>>> > This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need =
a
>> techie?
>> I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
>> <http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
>> I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com>
>> which now accepts Bitcoin.
>> I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
>> "He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
>> Nakamoto
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--f403045f8cd646caa60547a455b6
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Most of these are answered in the BIP, but for clarity:<di=
v><br></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px">&gt;Who dec=
ides on which companies are eligible?</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-=
size:12.800000190734863px">Preferably no one decides. The company would hav=
e to exist prior to the vote, and would need a public-facing website. In th=
e event of contested votes (meaning someone finds evidence of a fake compan=
y), the admin could investigate and post results.</span></div><div><span st=
yle=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D=
"font-size:12.800000190734863px">&gt;Is there some kind of centralized data=
base that one registers?</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.80000=
0190734863px">No.</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800000190734=
863px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px"=
>&gt;Who administers this?</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800=
000190734863px">I don&#39;t know. I&#39;m happy to volunteer, if no one els=
e wants to be responsible for it. The only task would be adding the confirm=
ed votes to each respective BIP. From there, everything&#39;s public and ca=
n be confirmed by everyone.</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.80=
0000190734863px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.80000019=
0734863px">&gt;What is to stop someone from creating a million fake compani=
es to sway the voting?</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8000001=
90734863px">The logistics of doing that prevent it. But let&#39;s say 10 fa=
ke companies ... first, you&#39;d need to register ten domain names, host a=
nd customize the website, all before the vote and in a way that no one woul=
d notice.</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px"><=
br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px">&gt;How=
 does a company make it&#39;s vote?</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-si=
ze:12.800000190734863px">Someone at the company sends a very small transact=
ion to the BIP&#39;s vote address. Someone at the company then posts what t=
he vote was and its transaction ID on the company&#39;s blog/twitter, etc.,=
 and then emails the URL to the administrator.</span><br></div><div><span s=
tyle=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px"><br></span></div><div><span style=
=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px">&gt;How does one verify that the person=
 voting on behalf of a company is actually the correct person?</span><div s=
tyle=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px"><div></div></div></div><div><span s=
tyle=3D"font-size:12.800000190734863px">They post it on their company blog.=
</span></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:19 AM, alp alp via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1=
px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:=
1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>This proposal seems hopelessly broken.</div><div=
><br></div>Who decides on which companies are eligible?=C2=A0 Is there some=
 kind of centralized database that one registers?=C2=A0 Who administers thi=
s?=C2=A0 What is to stop someone from creating a million fake companies to =
sway the voting?=C2=A0 How does a company make it&#39;s vote?=C2=A0 How doe=
s one verify that the person voting on behalf of a company is actually the =
correct person?<div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail-HOEnZb"><div class=3D"gmail-h5"><div class=3D"gmail_extra=
"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Dave Scote=
se via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@list=
s.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfounda=
tion.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;=
border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>=
<div><div>There are two ideas here for &quot;on-chain&quot; voting, both of=
 which require changes to the software.=C2=A0 I agree with David that on-ch=
ain solutions complicate things.=C2=A0 Both proposals can be effected witho=
ut any software changes:<br><br>Those who wish to use proof of stake can pr=
ovide a service for making vanity addresses containing some indicator of th=
e proposal to be supported - 1bigblock or 12mbblk or whatever - based on a =
supporter-provided secret key, and then supporters can move their bitcoin i=
nto their own vanity address and then whoever wants to can create a website=
 to display the matching addresses and explain that this is the financial p=
ower in the hands of supporters and how to add your &quot;financial power v=
ote.&quot;<br><br></div>Those who simply want to &quot;buy votes&quot; can =
use their funds in marketing efforts to promote the proposal they support.<=
br><br></div>This second method, of course, can be abused.=C2=A0 The first =
actually requires people to control bitcoin in order to represent support.=
=C2=A0 Counting actual, real people is still a technology in its infancy, a=
nd I don&#39;t think I want to see it progress much. People are not units, =
but individuals, and their value only becomes correlated to their net worth=
 after they&#39;ve been alive for many years, and even then, some of the be=
st people have died paupers. If bitcoin-discuss got more traffic, I think t=
his discussion would be better had on that list.<br><br></div>notplato<br><=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><div class=3D"gmail-m_-783939642568181=
3593h5"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Luke=
 Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev=
@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfounda=
<wbr>tion.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:sol=
id;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Strongly disagree w=
ith buying &quot;votes&quot;, or portraying open standards as a<br>
voting process. Also, this depends on address reuse, so it&#39;s fundamenta=
lly<br>
flawed in design.<br>
<br>
Some way for people to express their support weighed by coins (without<br>
losing/spending them), and possibly weighed by running a full node, might<b=
r>
still be desirable. The most straightforward way to do this is to support<b=
r>
message signatures somehow (ideally without using the same pubkey as<br>
spending), and some [inherently unreliable, but perhaps useful if the<br>
community &quot;colludes&quot; to not-cheat] way to sign with ones&#39; ful=
l node.<br>
<br>
Note also that the BIP process already has BIP Comments for leaving textual=
<br>
opinions on the BIP unrelated to stake. See BIP 2 for details on that.<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
<div><div class=3D"gmail-m_-7839396425681813593m_7954997659320911193h5"><br=
>
<br>
On Thursday, February 02, 2017 7:39:51 PM t. khan via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br=
>
&gt; Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Thanks,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; - t.k.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; ----------------------<br>
&gt; BIP: ?<br>
&gt; Layer: Process<br>
&gt; Title: Community Consensus Voting System<br>
&gt; Author: t.khan &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:teekhan42@gmail.com" target=3D"_b=
lank">teekhan42@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; Comments-Summary: No comments yet.<br>
&gt; Comments-URI: TBD<br>
&gt; Status: Draft<br>
&gt; Type: Standards Track<br>
&gt; Created: 2017-02-02<br>
&gt; License: BSD-2<br>
&gt; Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDGDTmZvkE5U<wbr>uwh8=C2=A0 (just an=
 example, don=E2=80=99t<br>
&gt; send to this!)<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Abstract<br>
&gt; Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS) will allow developers to meas=
ure<br>
&gt; support for BIPs prior to implementation.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Motivation<br>
&gt; We currently have no way of measuring consensus for potential changes =
to<br>
&gt; the Bitcoin protocol. This is especially problematic for controversial=
<br>
&gt; changes such as the max block size limit. As a result, we have many<br=
>
&gt; proposed solutions but no clear direction.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Also, due to our lack of ability to measure consensus, there is a gene=
ral<br>
&gt; feeling among many in the community that developers aren=E2=80=99t lis=
tening to<br>
&gt; their concerns. This is a valid complaint, as it=E2=80=99s not possibl=
e to listen<br>
&gt; to thousands of voices all shouting different things in a crowded<br>
&gt; room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the Bitcoin community today.<b=
r>
&gt;<br>
&gt; The CCVS will allow the general public, miners, companies using Bitcoi=
n,<br>
&gt; and developers to vote for their preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99s=
 public and<br>
&gt; relatively difficult (expensive) to manipulate.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Specification<br>
&gt; Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is =
added<br>
&gt; to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by<b=
r>
&gt; sending a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP&#39;s addre=
ss. Each<br>
&gt; transaction counts as 1 vote.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Confirmed Vote Multiplier:<br>
&gt; Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core maintainers/contributo=
rs<br>
&gt; are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is worth 10,000x=
 a<br>
&gt; regular vote.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; For example:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then states public=
ly<br>
&gt; (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails the URL t=
o the<br>
&gt; admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will count as 10,0=
00<br>
&gt; votes.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitFury, etc., all do the same.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Confirmed votes would be added to a new section in each respective BIP=
 as a<br>
&gt; public record.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a particular bl=
ock<br>
&gt; number is mined.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Rationale<br>
&gt; Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twofold; it gives a=
<br>
&gt; larger voice to organizations and the people who will have to do the w=
ork<br>
&gt; to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will negate th=
e<br>
&gt; effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedly.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Definitions<br>
&gt; Miner: any individual or organization that has mined at least one vali=
d<br>
&gt; block in the last 2016 blocks.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Company using Bitcoin: any organization using Bitcoin for financial, a=
sset<br>
&gt; or other purposes, with either under development and released solution=
s.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Developer: any individual who has or had commit access, and any indivi=
dual<br>
&gt; who has authored a BIP<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Unresolved Issues<br>
&gt; Node voting: It would be desirable for any full node running an up-to-=
date<br>
&gt; blockchain to also be able to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But =
as<br>
&gt; this would require code changes, it is outside the scope of this BIP.<=
br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Copyright<br>
&gt; This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license.<br>
</div></div>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br></div></div><span class=3D"gma=
il-m_-7839396425681813593HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888">-- <br><div class=
=3D"gmail-m_-7839396425681813593m_7954997659320911193gmail_signature"><div =
dir=3D"ltr">I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do =
you need a techie?=C2=A0 <br>I own <a href=3D"http://www.litmocracy.com" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">Litmocracy</a> and <a href=3D"http://www.memeracing.net" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">Meme Racing</a> (in alpha). <br>I&#39;m the webmaster for <=
a href=3D"http://www.voluntaryist.com" target=3D"_blank">The Voluntaryist</=
a> which now accepts Bitcoin.<br>I also code for <a href=3D"http://dollarvi=
gilante.com/" target=3D"_blank">The Dollar Vigilante</a>.<br>&quot;He ought=
 to find it more profitable to play by the rules&quot; - Satoshi Nakamoto</=
div></div>
</font></span></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--f403045f8cd646caa60547a455b6--