Call to Action: Campaign for Ideas on Witness Voting

in Hive Governance4 months ago

Campaign for Ideas on Witness Voting

I'd like to propose an idea that was inspired from @deathwing's post about Witness Voting...

It seems to me that we should come up with the best version of this in a democratic way... so here is one suggestion on how we may achieve that...

Campaign Method

I think we should use 1k Hive from the DHF to source ideas for the best voting method for witnesses. This period would last maybe a month and we use a specific tag e.g. "NewVotingMethod" for anyone who wants to participate in drafting up their own idea.

The top 20 witnesses would vote on which idea is the best and award the 1k Hive to the winner.

I don't think one idea will win, but there should be a winner. I think there would ultimately be a blend of the ideas. But post contest, there would be a call between the devs/witnesses to draft up the best version.

Upon creating the final draft best version this would essentially become a proposal. However, unlike our current proposals this is a proposal without a known person to create it. We would draft up the proposal and then come up with a reasonable amount to pay for a developer to make it.

For instance:

Upon final draft of the idea/proposal - We say it costs 20k HBD to compensate a dev to make it. If we don't get any takers we up the amount to 30k HBD, after another week we up the amount until we get a bite.

This specific proposal though would be unlike our current proposals seen in another way, in terms of audit. Because this idea was directly sourced by the community's input we would want constant updates in terms of progress being made, so that by the time HF25 is ready, the code is bulletproof.

This is actually how Uber Freight covers loads for shippers. When you need to hire a carrier to ship from point a to point b, you bid it out the opportunity that's needed until you get someone to accept. It's how we can ensure we pay a fair price and this could incentive new developers to action.

My Half Baked Idea

This is just an example, but I think the idea is outlined... I won't pretend I can think of the best version of how this should work... but here is my suggestion...

We would have voting cycles every year. Voting for witnesses are all synced and everyone will know when to campaign. I don't like the idea of your vote lasting 12 months because then voting would be staggered and there would be constant campaigning for votes.

Vote campaigning would be fair for all current witnesses and would incentive them to recruit support to hold their spot, maybe even form into teams. Which I think is also good since there are a limited number of witness positions. The stronger the team the stronger the campaign.

This would be fun and promote Hive too. New talent would see it as an opportunity and become a stakeholder of Hive. Hive witnesses would also give up some of their share to the team so it could lead to more vested stakeholders.

Call to Action

If anyone thinks this is a good idea, please do cross post or tweet. I don't think this is sharing dirty laundry on twitter, because I think it's important that we are constantly thinking of ways to enhance the value Hive brings to DPOS and leverage the community we have.


I don't like the idea of your vote lasting 12 months because then voting would be staggered and there would be constant campaigning for votes.

What do you mean by "voting would be staggered"?

Also, I'm wondering why you see constant campaigning for votes as a bad thing.

I'm saying some ideas out there would mean that a vote expires after 12 months. I think vote expiration should be synchronized so it's all at the same time. That way everyone is aligned when to campaign, kind of like how the US election cycle works.

I don't think constant campaigning is a bad thing but it's more efficient is vote expiration are synchronized on an anniversary date.

Thanks for letting me clarify that, hopefully that makes more sense now! What do you think?

I'm wondering about the benefits of synchronizing the witness voting. It's required for practical reasons when it comes to country elections. But when we have completely online systems like blockchains, we have a lot more flexibility about how to do it. The only benefit I see of having something like an election day is that it may possibly minimize the effort necessary on the part of users. But I am not sure of that even because you ideally will vote for multiple witnesses. Well, presumably you vote based on your observations of each witness for a period of time. So how are you going to do the voting on the election day - by keeping a list in advance of your observations and chosen witnesses? It just seems strange and quite unlikely. The usual workflow for me is to observe the behavior and contributions of a witness for some time and to vote for that witness at the point in time I think they are in my own top 20 of people who are best for this blockchain. Meaning, the point in time when a witness becomes worthy of my vote according to my personal estimate is when I vote. It would be strange to not vote at that point in time and instead wait for some future date to vote.

I also want a shorter feedback cycle - if someone isn't doing their job right, I want to immediately remove my vote, not wait till next election day.

I think it's to establish cadence so campaigning is more efficient and fun, rather than constant, more of a focused effort during the quarter. During a period you can vote but on a specific day all prior votes before that period would be reset, you don't have to vote on that day... would obviously require some update to the code.

You would be able to remove and change your vote at anytime, the specific date is just when all votes older than a year from that time are reset, any modified vote could remain constant.

E.g. Votes are on Nov. 3. On Dec 24 you decide you don't like your vote and change it. since that was past the prior vote period if you do nothing, for the next year vote the vote you changed would not be reset.

I agree with the shorter feedback cycle, no vote should remain constant because someone could not perform and we should take action.

But, this is why I said more should contribute to this idea, because you make some good points. I think we all would and I'd like to see a blend of our best ideas, rather than wait for top witness to listen to random suggestions and do what they want. How will we ensure the best collective ideas are presented eloquently? That's the purpose I'm trying to serve with this post. The campaign I'm suggesting could even be tweaked, this is just to get us all talking!

Thanks for contributing thou friend!

Resetting votes older than a year sounds better to me. :)

And yes, I agree, these kinds of discussions should be happening all the time, with ideas discussed and the best of each idea combined. A major issue I see is that a lot of low-quality ideas get put forth (the author didn't make much effort to develop the idea) and it reads like an attempt to put something out there mostly for the post rewards (I don't like what I'm saying but...). So for me this is a major reason not to engage with a lot of the proposed improvements.

@tipu curate 3

Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 8/32)

Congratulations @cryptoknight12! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You got more than 1750 replies. Your next target is to reach 2000 replies.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Do not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:

HiveBuzz supports meetups of the Hive UK Community

Congratulations @cryptoknight12! You received a personal badge!

Hive Veterans

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking

Do not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:

HiveBuzz supports meetups of the Hive UK Community

I just think that the vote decay for witnesses should be made faster. @cryptoknight12

Users authenticated (real ID) voting. We can have it, we have a voting system, we dont elect.