Pages:
Author

Topic: We could build a democracy out of bitcoin, here's how - page 3. (Read 2020 times)

sr. member
Activity: 299
Merit: 250
Ah, yes, put all your trust in the "experts"..... what could go wrong?
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
✪ NEXCHANGE | BTC, LTC, ETH & DOGE ✪
Agree with the meritocracy. Regular people proposing solutions are not good, as they do not know about all the risks and problems it takes to implement them
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
★ BitClave ICO: 15/09/17 ★
We don't want democracy. In democracies 10 sheeps vote is better than 9 professors. The right one is not always the most voted. I'm strongly against this proposition.
+1. We don't need democracy. We need "meritocracy". The people who knows what are they doing should decide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1011
We have a governance problem right now with the block size issue. It's not easy getting a consensus, it might even be impossible, so I wonder if it could be possible to organize a vote. Here's how we could do it.

To participate, you'd need to own BTC, and have several wallets, but I guess all of us do.

I would move, say, 5 BTC, from one of my wallets to another of my wallets, on a given day. The trick would be to embed in that transaction some code (which would have to be agreed upon beforehand), which would mean "I support XT" or "I support BIP 100". The transaction would be in the blockchain, and at the end of the day, some bot would calculate how many BTC have been moved with "I support XT" or "I support BIP 100".

I understand this system would give more voting rights to those who own the most BTC, but that doesn't worry me because I believe the more BTC you own, the best choice you will make to protect your investment. But we would need a system to prevent voters voting several times. I suggest that to have their votes validated, there should be no other transactions from the receiving wallet on voting day.

Now, since I'm not much of a techie, is that possible? And is it a good idea?

You should look up the definition of Oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy which is a far cry from Democracy.

I bolded your statement above that is almost the definition of an Oligarchy, so not sure where your idea of Democracy fit into this theory.
Zz
legendary
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1077
We don't want democracy. In democracies 10 sheeps vote is better than 9 professors. The right one is not always the most voted. I'm strongly against this proposition.
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1047
Your country may be your worst enemy
We have a governance problem right now with the block size issue. It's not easy getting a consensus, it might even be impossible, so I wonder if it could be possible to organize a vote. Here's how we could do it.

To participate, you'd need to own BTC, and have several wallets, but I guess all of us do.

I would move, say, 5 BTC, from one of my wallets to another of my wallets, on a given day. The trick would be to embed in that transaction some code (which would have to be agreed upon beforehand), which would mean "I support XT" or "I support BIP 100". The transaction would be in the blockchain, and at the end of the day, some bot would calculate how many BTC have been moved with "I support XT" or "I support BIP 100".

I understand this system would give more voting rights to those who own the most BTC, but that doesn't worry me because I believe the more BTC you own, the best choice you will make to protect your investment. But we would need a system to prevent voters voting several times. I suggest that to have their votes validated, there should be no other transactions from the receiving wallet on voting day.

Now, since I'm not much of a techie, is that possible? And is it a good idea?
Pages:
Jump to: