Quote from: othell_rogue on June 27, 2020, 07:07:21 PM

Let's assume you are a seller at work: If he don't fulfill your task of selling at least 6 products/ month and you sell only 4, you won't lose your commission only, you won't get your salary either. You would say to your boss: "shrouds fair to me"?.

Its funny that the only argument for your proposal that you bring is not related to network. It's like you said:
-We should limit plane speed. Planes should not fly with 500 MPH
-why?
-Because you will be killed driving that fast with car...

While you did not refer to my argument. This change would destroy network. No one will care about creating good flips for 1.5$. Let me put it other words:

-you can't take part in validation without creating flips
-you can't mine without creating flips
-you can do it all if you do 3 "1,2,3,4" flips in 30 seconds (without 4.5$ flip rewards)

Is this fair? It is worth to remember that network can't exist without good flips.

Quote from: othell_rogue on June 27, 2020, 07:07:21 PM

then let's make things "better" why we don't cut the ability of mining also if you make 3 bad flips, and if you make 4 you owe the Idena network some amount of DNA. Why not?! Let's do it!

Doing 3 flips is crucial for network and part of every node duty. I don't see a reason why not? 30% mining speed for 1 good flip, 60% for two 100% for 3, 120% for 4 and 150% for 5. Why not? The only case that you are right with is nomenclature that can be confusing. We have good flip reward (1.5$ ... for ~20 min work on flip to make it good) and on the other hand bad flip penalty. We could suggest to devs transfer flip reward funds to validation funds (no flip rewards but higher validation rewards) and leave flip penalty only. Simply to take part in validation you need to create 3 flips. If they were shitty than it is fair to cut validation rewards proportional. That way it would be less confusing.
But at the and it will not change anything despite nomenclature.
Or we could do like 500 DNA per good flip in rewards and reduce mining speed by x% to get funds for that and then apply your suggestion (no bad flip penalty). But in the end (amount of DNA in miner wallet) it will be similar to flip penalty based on reduction of mining speed (only diffrent nomenclature).
But just 1.5$ per flip and no bad flip penalty will destroy network and you know it.

Quote from: othell_rogue on June 27, 2020, 07:07:21 PM

I don't know who you are but it seems that you are taking the side of the project

In your opinion everything that Idena devs benefit from it is perfect,

I just want this network to grow and build long term value for miners and investors. Devs want it too. It should not surprise that we might have same opinion about many cases. And where is here profit for devs? Coins are burned not distributed to devs. You are talking about 100-500$ per epoch less in supply? It's nothing in comparison to 90% shitty flips that we would get after this change. I guess you agree with me because we were talkig a lot about bad flips before. You even wanted pre-validation flip validation:

Quote from: othell_rogue on April 27, 2020, 05:34:17 AM

Regarding the bad flips:
Maybe the team can implement a pre-validation flip verification, so the bad flips don't land on the Short session. The long validation can remain the same.

Now you want to change the only thing that gives financial motivation to create good flips? It does not makes sense.

In order to clarify. By writing "this change" I'm thinking about this suggestion:

Quote from: othell_rogue on June 27, 2020, 11:04:29 AM

A fair punishment will be to loose the reward for the reported flip not for all flips made, further more for Invites and Validation. What have to do a bad flip with the invite reward, or the validation?!

I voted for in official poll - https://idenapoll.com/poll/WfpWH8_
Current penalty is too harsh but no penalty is bad to. 50% is fair deal for me.