Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 1476. (Read 2761645 times)

Yes 

I like it. It removes the incentive to make multiple accounts to vote almost completely. Although, I assume that most people here vote in the best interest of NXT, so wouldn't a lot of people get their voting power reduced just because they always vote in the best interest of NXT (and thus are very likely to chose the same option)? Maybe this is a fringe case and not common at all? This seems to work better in multi-option polls, where it is much less likely for two individuals to coincide often. Also, this scenario just came to mind: Suppose someone creates 1000 accounts for the purpose of voting. Can't he game this system by randomly voting on issues he doesn't care about (reducing similarity greatly and not really influencing the vote in anyway) and when one he cares about does come up, he points all 1000 accounts at the option he wants? Because of his previous random voting pattern, the system will not be able to detect that he is gaming this particular vote.

We would also have to maintain a separate ledger to hold the records of all the accounts that voted, correct? (Or use AM, but at 1000 bytes per message, the number of messages required would increase over time as more and more accounts vote) We could run a parallel blockchain (secured by the NXT network) that only records matters dealing with the voting system. Voting would cost min fee (1 NXT), and these payments will be paid out to forgers, encouraging them to take on the second blockchain.

I've answered you already! We stopped because CfB said there will be a built-in voting system, so there is no point in making the site now if VS will be done in a week.

Great!

That is awesome indeed!

just a poll on a website,enough fair and tested

Boom!
That should create some more interest :-)

THe way i understand it is voting would just be a way of allowing the community to express its opinion. whether or not that opinion changes the way the network operates would be up to the developers. can someone confirm this?

I have good news for u dudes.They added Nxt!

This reminds me of my last thought last night before I headed to bed:

We all know that the banhammer is coming down on Bitcoin (and other cryptos) very soon in China.

We also all know that NXT will soon have an integrated Asset Exchange, freeing us from needing to use 3rd party exchanges such as DGEX, BTER, etc, and that this feature will be very useful in the current Chinese environment. No exchanges, true peer-2-peer currency exchange.

The possibly crazy concept here is : will it be possible (or can it be implemented?) to exchange other cryptos such as Bitcoin thru the NXT asset exchange, or an add-on to the AE?

If NXT could become a backdoor into (or out of) China for all other cryptos, things could get very interesting.

Yeah, I think you are close!

What does deadline mean when you send NXT? Best to just leave at 24hrs?

Agree, that sounds like a phenomenal idea!

I don't know if someone else read betwen the lines but...



hmmm...
NxtBitcoin?
NxtLitecoin?
One to fork them all?





NXT can handle all transactions from all ***coins that are out today together?


I think this will become really huge... think about Bitcoin on top of NXT

Sorry, I'm dreaming...

Time to repeat myself:

My proposal: small group of guys organise, throw up a quick and dirty voting website as soon as possible, taking as much community feedback into account as possible.

We vote, see how it goes, then change/modify/tweak the voting system until the flood of complaints about it are reduced to a minimum.
Once the site is working to (almost) everyones satisfaction, transfer that functionality into the Nxt client(s)

I propose: utopianfuture, smartwart, coolmist (and anyone else who feels really strongly about it or has the tech skills to get a site up) form a working group and throw something up on the Webs to try out.

How do you know if that is what he wanted you to think. My beliefs still stands, if it's true, maybe i will get a reward or something from him. hahaha
I Originally invested in Peercoin and was so into Sunny, as it was the only one standing out at the time, until i saw nxt and i moved all my assets over, made few losses on the way but gained much more.

I don't think we will ever come to an agreement.  How much do we need to vote on anyway?  Let's put this to rest and let the core developers tackle the "how to"

One idea from some here is that a person with more coins, cares more for the system, so he should have more voting power.
so they say 1 coin = 1 vote. People who disagree say that Richman can have 1 account with 1 mil coins, and 1000 accounts with 1000 coins, and his word will be the law of the land.

This is based on an assumption, that Richman will care more for the system than his personal profit, so therefore his word should be the law of the land.

Then there is the idea, that 1 account = 1 vote. People who disagree say that Richman can make 10000 accounts with n coins, and his word will be the law of the land.

In both ideas Richman has the advantage. That is because his vote weighs as much as his wallet.

The only way for him to lose the advantage is not to associate vote weight with ones money. We should not forget, Richman is here for profit.
The rest just want to beat him to it. Let's not pretend it is "right" or "ethical" for Richman to have more power on every aspect.

It won't prevent anyone from making a ton of new accounts, however when they use those accounts to vote for one option the accounts that appear to be participating in a organized manner will have their similarity increased,decreasing voting weight.

similarity starts as one for all accounts

Vote issue 1 is split by a 60% 40% vote

statistically a voter chosen at random will have a 60% chance of choosing the winning outcome, a person with multiple accounts has a higher probability initially.

Vote issue 2 is split by a 60% 40% vote

Vote issue 3 is split by a 60% 40% vote

BankA_x represents accounts that voted and won.

If BankA₁ contains [accounts a, b, c, d, x, y and z]

and BankA₂ contains [accounts b, c, y and z]

and BankA₃ contains [accounts a, b, y and z] and



b, y and z's similarity will be increased by .1/ (.216), .216 being the probability of that occurring naturally (.6^3). As the probability goes to zero the similarity is increased exponentially.

The mixer/exchange problem is circumvented by adding the timesVoted variable, the more times an account has cast a vote for an issue the more weight his vote will have exponentially.

So if you don't vote and try to game the system by varying votes between accounts you will be left in the dust by people consistently voting.

An account recently made will have 25% the voting power of a account that has voted once already.