Quote from: alkan on April 17, 2017, 06:47:17 PM

In a recent article I proposed a dual-token approach to blockchain consensus. The system aims to provide economic decentralization, fulfilling the paradigm: One entity, one vote! The model stands in a stark contrast to existing blockchains like Bitcoin, Ethereum or NXT in which the influence of a party is proportional (or even superlinear) to its resources or stake. My proposal can be broken down into the following key points:

- The blockchain makes use of two different tokens: minter accounts and currency units (coins)
- Blocks can only be built by minter accounts
- The creation rate of minter accounts is limited: With every block, only a predefined number of new minters accounts are created.
- Minter accounts can be sold once upon creation, while further sales are strongly discouraged as the seller will still know the private key (and could steal the funds back any time).
- No economic incentive to own multiple accounts

In my second post I relax some of the assumptions made in my seminal article and further explore the design space around Proof of Membership blockchains. The name Proof of Membership is chosen to express that every member of the system can contribute to the blockchain, while a members impact on the consensus is not based on stake nor on hash rate. Even though it is impossible to physically restrict the number of accounts held by a member, we can make it economically pointless to possess more than one (or maybe a few) account.

You can find my article here: https://hackernoon.com/proof-of-membership-for-blockchains-1534a3f9faba

Please let me know what you think!