Topic: [ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN - page 512. (Read 782382 times)

The proposal system is part of the built in decentralized blockchain voting feature. Starting at block 43200 10% of the block rewards will be set aside for the budget, this budget is used to fund anything that the community of Masternode holders vote to approve. It can also be used to transparently gauge support for ideas. I am sure that others will be able to come up with even more clever uses. Anyone can submit proposals for voting, and Masternode holders vote for what they like and against what they don't. Every 43200 blocks, or once a month, all items in the finalized budget will be paid out. In order for a proposal to be accepted into the finalized budget it must be active for at least 1 day and receive a yes vote from at least 10% of the current Masternodes. If many proposals are approved they will be added to the budget starting with the most yes votes until all of the budget is spent.

I think that covers most of the more important aspects. If you have any more specific questions fire away.

This coin is again on the right road.

Can we have a simple explanation of how this proposal system works? (not a how to, but just highlevel on how it works)
Is this something only DNET has or do other coins with masternodes have this system also?

Happy to see this coin going in the right direction.

I suggest s3v3nh4cks or you start the proposal for exchange listing, because it will involve holding a substantial amount.

Yeah, I think it may be my favorite feature. It really allows a degree of community involvement that is just not there with most other coins. You can submit a proposal for anything you can imagine, whether the community approves of it is another thing. One of the things s3v3nh4cks and I had discussed was using a portion of the budget to pay to get listed on certain exchanges. Go ahead and find out what it costs for any of a number of things you think would help the coin, submit a proposal, and see where it goes. In the next few days s3v3nh4cks and I will be setting up a multisig wallet that can be used for budget proposals as well. I can imagine a situation where a good idea gets shot down because trusting someone to do what they say they will with the coins once they are in their wallet is hard if you are talking about a substantial sum.

This budget proposal thing looks like an amazing feature. We can even start a proposal for Poloniex listing right . Anyone knows how much will be their listing charge.

Looks a bit complicated but I will give it a try.

It is really not that bad. All of these instructions assume you are using the Qt wallet, you could also enter the commands on the command line preceded by "./darknet-cli" if using darknetd.

Go to the console and prepare the proposal, the syntax is "mnbudget prepare name url payment_count block_start darknet_address monthly_payment_darknet" for the BlockExplorer proposal the exact command I entered was "mnbudget prepare BlockExplorer bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1262920.msg14012433#msg14012433 1 43200 D7SP47ZN3ZGdrVsAvmG2f3CQF6Ca6grdLX 57142".
The "name" and "url" parameters should be self evident, note that there is a 64 character limit on the url, that is why I removed the "https://", the "payment_count" is the number of monthly payments to make, the "1" I used indicates a 1 time payment, a proposal could be broken up into smaller monthly payments over any period of time. The "block_start" is the block at which the proposal will be included in the budget, it must be the first block in a new 30 day period, block 43200 will be the first block that can be used, and they will increment by 43200, so the next eligible block would be 86400. "darknet_address" is the address of the you want the payment sent to, it costs 50 DNET to make a proposal, so make sure you have received at least one payment to your Masternode before preparing the proposal. The "monthly_payment_darknet" parameter is the amount of DNET to be paid monthly, or once, if it is a one time payment.

After you enter that command if all goes well you will be met with a transaction hash.

Now, you need to submit the prepared proposal. The syntax for that command is "mnbudget submit name url payment_count block_start darknet_address monthly_payment_darknet fee_tx". All of the parameters are the same, with the addition of the transaction hash that was output when preparing the proposal, add that in and hit enter, the output will be the hash for the proposal. That hash is the one used for voting.

If you need anything clarified let me know, don't let my drawn out description of the process stop you, once you do it you will realize how simple it is, and if you are anything like me you will get a fuzzy feeling of empowerment inside.

I have no idea how to do that 

Can you do me a favor and submit a proposal, I don't want to be the only one doing it. Having more than one option for voting is really what democracy is all about, right? We really want this to be a community driven coin. If you need a guide let me know, I can throw something together.

I think a second explorer would be better, maybe chainz. You get an extra node and also all the masternode stuff with location, uptime and all that.

Next proposal, s3v3nh4cks has paid presstab for 6 months of block explorer goodness, as this is a long term project we would like to go ahead and pay for another year. Despite the recent pump, we think 500 sats is a fair price to assess the value at for the purposes of this proposal. Assuming a $420 bitcoin at $10/month when paying for a year we are looking at ~.2857 BTC, or ~57,142 DNET. If the prices have changed substantially when the payout occurs I will personally cover the difference if there is a shortage, in the event of an excess, the extra coins will go into a general fund to be used for other costs associated with the furtherance of the coin, and will be spent with complete transparency. So, that is what you will be voting on in this proposal. Whether you think we should set aside 57,142 DNET for the purpose of paying presstab for the block explorer to be continued for an additional year, for a total of 18 months. Again, I will add an edit in a bit with the proposal hash and voting commands.

Edit: The hash for this proposal is fc7b4cc188e011ef784f07ccc3f01dc66bc6e932f863f628c1156440f20e184b and the name is "BlockExplorer"
"mnbudget vote fc7b4cc188e011ef784f07ccc3f01dc66bc6e932f863f628c1156440f20e184b yes" to vote yes
"mnbudget vote fc7b4cc188e011ef784f07ccc3f01dc66bc6e932f863f628c1156440f20e184b no" to vote no
"mnbudget getinfo BlockExplorer" to see what's up

I am going to be submiting a few budget proposals today.

First, a new proposal regarding PoS reward functions.

I think we have more or less agreed that the seesaw mechanism we discussed should be implemented. A refresher for the unfamiliar, as that conversation has been lost a few pages back.

Once the block rewards switch from PoW to PoS there will need to be a certain number of coins in Masternodes to serve the functions provided by them, namely, Obfuscation, a coin mixing/anonymizing service, and SwiftTX, a method of guaranteeing zero confirmation transactions. A portion of coins will also be needed to be staking, securing the network. When there are fewer coins staking the potential income from staking an individual coin is increased, and would encourage coins to be taken out of Masternodes to stake when the potential profit might be higher staking vs. running a Masternode. The reverse is also true, when there are a smaller number of Masternodes each one can expect to receive more payments over a given period of time, thereby increasing the profitability, and making it desirable to lock up coins one may have staking into a Masternode.

In order to prevent the network from constantly swinging back and forth between an over abundance of Masternodes, and an exceptionally high percent of overall coins staking we have proposed a "seesaw" mechanism. This would alter the division of block rewards dynamically between stakers and Masternodes to minimize the difference in profitability. The desired ratio of staking coins to Masternodes has yet to be determined, that will be looked at closer to the switch. But, effectively, when there are more coins staking than the ideal ratio as compared with the number of coins in Masternodes the seesaw mechanism would award a higher percentage of the block reward to the winning Masternode than the staker of a particular block. Conversely, when there are an abundance of Masternodes, a higher percentage of the block reward would go to the staker.

This approach should lead to a stable network that ultimately finds itself in homeostasis. There are several variables that have yet to be determined, what is the ideal ratio of coins staking vs locked up in Masternodes, when the ideal balance is achieved what should be the reward split between stakers and Masternodes, how quickly should the seesaw react to a change in the balance, how sharply should the reward split vary when an adjustment needs to be made, etc. Those topics will all be discussed between now and the beginning of PoS, we have a few months to get things right, feel free to express your opinions and ideas on those issues. We need to get the level of conversation in here back to where it was a couple weeks ago.

Anyway, a vote in favor of this proposal will simply be a show of support for the seesaw mechanism, and shouldn't be confused with supporting any of the other variables that need to be determined to make it work. I will edit this in a bit with the voting instructions for this proposal. I have to actually go and submit it, I needed a URL to refer to when creating it.

Edit: The hash for this proposal is 4f043c38c4bac63b3915fd6b45d7bf07db6240cc100351ac836d00d841c52988 in order to vote, from your Masternode enter  "mnbudget vote 4f043c38c4bac63b3915fd6b45d7bf07db6240cc100351ac836d00d841c52988 yes" to vote in favor. To vote against enter "mnbudget vote 4f043c38c4bac63b3915fd6b45d7bf07db6240cc100351ac836d00d841c52988 no"

To see a list of the current proposals enter "mnbudget show", you can also look at individual proposals with the "mnbudget getinfo" command. You will need the name of the proposal to use this method, this proposal is named PoSRewardSchedulev2, so the command would be "mnbudget getinfo PoSRewardSchedulev2".

Why skype and not a Telegram group

Good,   its all about minting right now and hoarding till PoS kicks in.

Seems like loops was right..  Too many sellers..miners..will rebuy at 100-150 

As the number of Masternodes increases it is becoming more and more difficult to find your Masternodes with "masternode list". A better way to check on your Masternodes is by using "masternode list-conf", it will show you the status of all Masternodes in your masternode.conf. Also, as opposed to using "masternode start-many", you should use "masternode start-alias XXX" replacing the XXX with the alias of the Masternode you want to start that you used in your masternode.conf. Using the start-many function causes all of you Masternodes to be moved to the end of the queue, resulting in lost payment opportunities. There are a variety of reasons for Masternodes to fall out of the list, start by double checking that the wallets are actually running, have sufficient connections, and that the appropriate configuration files are setup properly.

Not sure why it would have stopped. I recommend you to monitor your MN every few hours to check its status via "masternode status".

3 of my 5 masternodes received payments during the night. I checked "masternode outputs" and "masternode list". Only 2 of my masternodes were in the list. I typed "masternode start-many" and 3 masternodes were added to the list again.
Why could they stopped during the night?
So after starting 5 masternodes 23 hr ago i received only 5 payments.

LOL still fudding dnet for cheap coins