Re: [ANN] Ħ [HODL] Fork at Block 86000 - Update before July 11th

I've a motion that I'd like HOdler's input on -

http://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-an-open-source-gpu-solo-miner-would-be-a-welcome-development

Previously I hadn't encouraged the development of a GPU miner software as my judgement was that GPU miners would likely be dumpers. Now that miners will be required to be HOdlers, I think a GPU miner would be a welcome development as it will help to raise the network hashrate in the absence of pool dumpers. Please vote your views on this issue. The motion is advisory in nature.

makes sence, hodled "Aye!"

I don't think I'm going to vote anymore. All these decisions are being steamrolled one way or the other by the top hodlers. My vote means nothing up against someone with 20 times the voting power that I have so what's the point?

There's no other reliable way to do it. However, voting is only part of a Nutocracy, active discussion and debate is vital too. I think the course of the recent fork was steered significantly by discussion from a drastic cut in block rewards to hodling block rewards. It might be for smaller hodlers that they have greater impact through influence and persuasion of larger hodlers.

So ok, if I'm reading the charts correctly there are roughly 55 Million Hodls in future matured value, so 55 Million Hodls worth of voting power. How did you justify setting the "Enact" bar at 5 Million in voting power? If you were really interested in a representation of the 'voice' of the Hodlers, that bar should have been set at somewhere around 30 Million so you get a clear majority. Because that 5 million arbitrary number was met with just the first 10 big Hodlers who voted on that side (10 out of 2362 HODlers! That's 0.4%!), and your total voted on that side (about 6.1 million) only represents about 11% of the 'voices' of the HOdlers. At the very least it would have provided more time for the "active discussion and debate" and the "influence and persuasion" you speak of. You still have time before the fork, put this on HODL and open up the voting again on that measure. If you truly believe that the future of this coin should be ruled by Nutocracy, then put your HODL where your mouth is and get 30 Million in votes. THAT will quiet some of the critics (including me) of this whole process.

I'm going to start collecting publishing answers on the reddit thread and referring there as I think the answers are getting lost here, so questions are being repeated:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Hodl/comments/4qpx9g/we_hodl_that_block_rewards_should_remain/d5308rz

https://www.reddit.com/r/Hodl/comments/4qrfny/nutocracy_of_the_nuts_for_the_nuts_and_by_the/d530kic

"FAQ: Why are only 10% of HOdlings are required to pass a motion?

10% on one side of a motion is reflective of a 20% turnout. Having been involved in voting coins before, I know this is a very high engagement for any vote. Setting any higher might set the bar too high for passing any controversial motion."

The problem with this logic is that you are comparing apples to oranges here. If there are 100 eligible voters and you get 20 to come out and vote, THEN you have a 20% turnout. You have 60 voters (total from both sides) out of 2362 eligible voters, which is a 2.5% turnout. You are talking about 10% of voting power based on HOdlings, which is not the same thing as getting a 20% turnout of eligible voters. 2.5% is NOT a representative vote, and this is exactly why so many people are upset. You threw up Nutocracy, something which a lot of people weren't familiar with or at the very least didn't understand how to use (and still don't!), then plastered that same voting system with a big warning telling people effectively that if they voted they were going to lose their coins to hackers which discouraged them from voting, created arbitrary guidelines for the adoption of a measure, created a measure to do something drastic, and then declared it to be the will of the people after 10 people out of 2362 voted for it in the span of two days and then distributed and required the change. Do you see how this looks from the outside?

Again, if you truly believe in this voting system, then follow your own words! Get your 20% (total) turnout of eligible voters, and THEN look for your HOdling amount to determine if it should pass. So 20% turnout of eligible voters total, AND 10% minimum of Hodling power on a side, AND more yes votes than no votes. That seems to be more than fair doesn't it? Your big HOdlers still get to sway the vote in a big way, but they can't run away with it as they have done already.