Quote from: Xpedite on January 29, 2014, 10:25:01 PM

Quote from: Thies1965 on January 29, 2014, 07:59:29 PM

Mining is called forging with NXT.
It is advertised that transparent forging is one of the key factors and differentiators of NXT.

I tried to understand the algorithm behind that forging mechanism. I did not find anything (except looking into the decompiled code).

IMHO: NXT concept of forging does not follow the approach of 'fairness'; it generates GODS and GIANTS. The more NXT you have the more NXT you will receive. This approach does not support the concept behind NEM.

A much more flexible and less chunk building algorithm has to be developed/defined.

Any suggestions / ideas?

I could't agree more!
It should be as fair as possible so definately not solely based on account balance, since this eliminates 'middle class' users.

Since any person with a large account balance could split it up into multiple smaller accounts to act as if they were many poorer users, this is very difficult to implement.

One possibility I can think of though is to maybe factor in the ratio of fees spent by an account in the last x days to account balance. This would allow you to favor those using the balance of their accounts, rather than just stockpiling it. One could attempt to game that system by sending money to themselves, but doing so would add cost to them, and cause others to gain more in transaction fees, and with proper weighting of how much the ratio matters, might not allow them to gain more than they spent on fees for trying to affect their ratio. However there is a major flaw with that idea. Since the next account to forge a block can be predicted, one could spend a lot in fees when they know they will forge the next block. In order to avoid someone doing that the fee would have to be scattered around more, to avoid all of it going to one predictable person, like if 50% of the fee went to the forger of the block the transaction is in, and 25% of the fee to each of the next two block forgers.

In mvag's post, version 5 of the logo is great.
In Jenska's post, does version 6 remind anyone else of the internet explorer logo?