Regardless of whether Rob wants to participate or not, we can design an innovative whale-proof MN voting system that gives everyone equal voting power.
Lets think outside of the DASH box. I suggest a registration process where each staked MN investor is verified and added to a voter registration list. Each voter is assigned an ID via the same process used by legitimate crypto exchanges. Every registered voter gets one vote regardless of how many MNs they own. The majority vote wins. Anyone who wants to remain anonymous simply doesn't register to vote.
This type of democratic voting system would appeal to forward looking Christians interested in investing in a charitable coin where Christ is the only King.
Interesting idea, how do you validate someone only has 1 identity?
And where would this service live, on the blockchain?
We could use the
CoinBase.com model to verify. They require an email address, a phone number for Logins (2-step verification via text message) and either a Passport, Driver's License or State/Country etc issued Photo ID.
Either incorporate it into the chain somehow, or use a secure website like
CoinBase.com does.
There's likely a lot of services that offer individuals to validate KYC and can be trusted.
https://www.civic.com/solutions/kyc-services/#1 Rob is highly against revealing his personal details. Explains why pseudonyms are being used instead of actual name. I highly doubt he will participate.
#2 Not perfect, but if you tie masternode voting so that you need an active CPID, that may be lower hanging fruit. We already use CPID to somewhat tie to a specific wallet address. So, your CPID is tied to your masternode somehow. Not sure the impact with third-party services... we already have more requirements to run a masternode, so having another requirement may be unappealing? Compared to KYC and tying that to masternode voting, I don't really envision that happening. At least with CPID, you have a little bit more distributed anonymity.
I don't expect Rob to participate, or for that matter ever give up control of his coin. I wish him the best, hopefully someday our investments in BBP will pay off.
In the meantime we can brainstorm improvements that will appeal to people who want more than Rob offers. Better transparency, better governance, better function, ease of use, leadership, unity, trust and price stability.
Personally I think the creepy type of anonymity that is common in the crypto world is a liability. FaceBook would never have reached their level of success with that model. Even DASH continues to move away from their XCoin / DarkCoin history.
A reasonable amount of anonymity is desirable, certainly in virtual environments like bitcointalk, discord, slack. But the larger Christian community/church will never feel comfortable hanging out in places where an anonymous stranger can profanely interrupt the conversation/mood at any time.
FB uses an open account registration model, yet requires a private invitation to join someone's community. So does LinkedIn. Every bank requires ID verification, yet they all provide a reasonable amount of anonymity. Credit card companies do the same thing, as do legitimate crypto exchanges.
A similar new coin based on Christian principles and innovation can offer reasonable privacy, plus the transparency needed to conduct business in a trustworthy way that the outside world will respect.
There's no reason to rush ahead with a new project, or even propose changes for Rob to reject. BBP provides an opportunity for us to learn how to do it better and gives us an open-source platform that can be customized when needed.