Ok since you decided to move to a new slack out of nowhere. etc. Let's continue here.
Where or who is going to hold these new funds from blockshares and the upcoming crowdfund?
It should be released via vote by the share holders. You might be the pope but we're in this context of anonimity, investors need asurance.... the less trust needed, the healthier for everyone. Submit a budget and let the community decide if you get the funds or not.
Where or who is going to hold these new funds from blockshares and the upcoming crowdfund?
It should be released via vote by the share holders. You might be the pope but we're in this context of anonimity, investors need asurance.... the less trust needed, the healthier for everyone. Submit a budget and let the community decide if you get the funds or not.
I find it strange that you want to *continue* here. Last i checked we were discussing the rules for the voting system. I think the simplest and fairest rule to ensure that a majority is what has voted, not a highly organized minority is to require a 60% voter turn out . Your suggestion to keep the vote between yes/no makes the assumption that there will only ever be two options, which i think will not be the case. So now with 60% of eligible voters having cast votes, i think that we can then use a simple tally. We can of course go a little further and attempt to apply something like STV or an alternative vote system, depending on user response to this post.
So if only ChainIDs can vote, the voter pool is smaller eh ?
??
dev
