Topic: [ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network - page 31. (Read 1201436 times)

It's normal process on in active market actually altcoins following the trend of BTC if this will get bullish sentiments than surely other will start moving into same direction. I like this coin so much and that is the reason this is on my portfolio as long term investment.

from:
https://dcrstats.com/

Current PoS pool value is 4 556 994 DCR,
 it's 48.69 % of total available supply.

But ticket prices go up and up.

Is there a site that shows how much Decreds are locked in staking pool in total? Because a correlation might be forming here. If Decred's price is low, then more holders = higher ticket prices. If Decred's price is high, more sellers totake profit = lower ticket prices?

price is going down, and down, down and.....

price is going down, and down, down and.....

I see.
First of all, I don't believe there has ever been any other type of governance. I know we all supposedly live in a "democracy" but in reality, it's always the elite that rule.
Sure it's a better system than ruling by birthright. They rule by getting voted in and for a limited time, but still, its just a different form of oligarchy, even if it's a better one.
And in the other extreme, even the most fearsome and absolute tyrant cannot do everything by himself. He would have to delegate some power to his trusted elite.

Just the fact that on-chain governance is still an oligarchy does not make it a joke, unless it had an explicit goal of not being an oligarchy.

If you can have more transparency, more meritocracy, fewer barriers to entry, and in general a more robust system of values or rules by which to govern, it can be an upgrade despite still being an oligarchy.

I read, some time ago, a really great article around challenging the idea of plutocracy in blockchain governance (I'd argue Decred is more plutocratic than oligarch). Really excellent read.
https://medium.com/mosaic-network-blog/is-plutocratic-on-chain-governance-really-a-bad-thing-68132700205c

And then there's this gem which both Vlad and Vitalik have a nice response to:
https://medium.com/@FEhrsam/blockchain-governance-programming-our-future-c3bfe30f2d74

Great food for thought, for those of us that like to probe 

So I have not been paying attention like I should.

Just noticed and updated to the current wallet.

I'm on Windows 10 and running the Decredation and my wallet shows synced with my correct amount.

The issue I have is it shows about half of my Current Balance as Available. I don't have any Tickets Open and on the Tickets tab it shows 0 active tickets.

Is there a way or command to try and rebalance the wallet?

Not sure if any of the normal commands work and I did not want to try and mess the wallet up.

Truthfuly, I can't too. But that wasn't the point. Because if on-chain governance is run by the oligarchs, then why re-invent the wheel?

I'm sorry for the probing questions, but I'm trying to find a good reply for those people who say that "on-chain governance is a joke".

Truthfuly, I can't too. But that wasn't the point. Because if on-chain governance is run by the oligarchs, then why re-invent the wheel?

I'm sorry for the probing questions, but I'm trying to find a good reply for those people who say that "on-chain governance is a joke".

Can you think of a better alternative? Cause I sure can't, at least not one that is not easy to exploit.

Building a DEX run by its stakeholding participants is a perfect use of Politeia.  

My only concern/suggestion is regarding coding from scratch yet another exchange when production-ready code plus actual users already exist for Bisq.
Sure, that code is in Java and not Go.  But a refactor/rewrite offers opportunity for polishing Bisq while maximizing our DeX's compatibility with it.
Since Bisq already supports DCR, I'm increasingly wary of "Not Invented Here" syndrome inducing duplication of efforts at the expense of our Treasury (which is currently crippled by low Winter prices).

The tricky bits for any dex are the networking and PKI, which are most easily developed in a purpose-built high level language like Java.
The trade off for Java is the larger (relative to Rust/Go) footprint (aka attack surface) which is a mess of dependencies, gobs of memory, and undefined behavior in edge/corner case bugs.

That's why Monero's community funded a valiant yet ultimately futile effort to port I2P from Java to C++.


It's annoying seeing anything Decred does compared to harmful digital trash like Blocknet (a Dash-like 2014 era scam that uses Masternodes) and Komodo (another 2014 scam going back to jl777's "Bitcoin Dark" shitcoin scammunity).


In other news, Cardano announced and delivered their privacy/fungibility whitepaper in less time than Decred has spent waiting for their pre-announced solution to materialize:

Litecoin has also announced their choice of CT to make LTC fungible.

Where is Decred's privacy solution?  If we don't have one then making atomic swaps with coins that do/will (XMR/LTC/ADA) should be the next priority after the BTC/DCR minimum viable product.