[1]), I think we should wrap up the endless debate with voting by
different stakeholder groups.
---------------------------------
Candidate proposals
Candidate proposals must be complete BIPs with reference
implementation which are ready to merge immediately. They must first
go through the usual peer review process and get approved by the
developers in a technical standpoint, without political or
philosophical considerations. Any fine tune of a candidate proposal
may not become an independent candidate, unless it introduces some
“real” difference. “No change” is also one of the voting
options.
---------------------------------
Voter groups
There will be several voter groups and their votes will be counted
independently. (The time frames mentioned below are just for
example.)
Miners: miners of blocks with timestamp between 1 to 30 Sept 2015
are eligible to vote. One block one vote. Miners will cast their
votes by signing with the bitcoin address in coinbase. If there are
multiple coinbase outputs, the vote is discounted by output value /
total coinbase output value.
Many well-known pools are reusing addresses and they may not need
to digitally sign their votes. In case there is any dispute, the
digitally signed vote will be counted.
Bitcoin holders: People with bitcoin in the UTXO at block 372500
(around early September) are eligible to vote. The total
“balance” of each scriptPubKey is calculated and this is the
weight of the vote. People will cast their votes by digital
signature.
Special output types:
Multi-sig: vote must be signed according to the setting of the
multi-sig.
P2SH: the serialized script must be provided
Publicly known private key: not eligible to vote
Non-standard script according to latest Bitcoin Core rules: not
eligible to vote in general. May be judged case-by-case
Developers: People with certain amount of contribution in the past
year in Bitcoin Core or other open sources wallet / alternative
implementations. One person one vote.
Exchanges: Centralized exchanges listed on Coindesk Bitcoin Index,
Winkdex, or NYSE Bitcoin index, with 30 days volume >100,000BTC are
invited. This includes Bitfinex, BTC China, BitStamp, BTC-E, itBit,
OKCoin, Huobi, Coinbase. Exchanges operated for at least 1 year with
100,000BTC 30-day volume may also apply to be a voter in this
category. One exchange one vote.
Merchants and service providers: This category includes all bitcoin
accepting business that is not centralized fiat-currency exchange,
e.g. virtual or physical stores, gambling sites, online wallet
service, payment processors like Bitpay, decentralized exchange like
Localbitcoin, ETF operators like Secondmarket Bitcoin Investment
Trust. They must directly process bitcoin without relying on third
party. They should process at least 100BTC in the last 30-days. One
merchant one vote.
Full nodes operators: People operating full nodes for at least 168
hours (1 week) in July 2015 are eligible to vote, determined by the
log of Bitnodes. Time is set in the past to avoid manipulation. One
IP address one vote. Vote must be sent from the node’s IP address.
--------------------
Voting system
Single transferable vote is applied.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote [2]). Voters
are required to rank their preference with “1”, “2”,
“3”, etc, or use “N” to indicate rejection of a candidate.
Vote counting starts with every voter’s first choice. The
candidate with fewest votes is eliminated and those votes are
transferred according to their second choice. This process repeats
until only one candidate is left, which is the most popular
candidate. The result is presented as the approval rate: final votes
for the most popular candidate / all valid votes
After the most popular candidate is determined, the whole counting
process is repeated by eliminating this candidate, which will find
the approval rate for the second most popular candidate. The process
repeats until all proposals are ranked with the approval rate
calculated.
--------------------
Interpretation of results:
It is possible that a candidate with lower ranking to have higher
approval rate. However, ranking is more important than the approval
rate, unless the difference in approval rate is really huge. 90%
support would be excellent; 70% is good; 50% is marginal; <50% is
failed.
--------------------
Technical issues:
Voting by the miners, developers, exchanges, and merchants are
probably the easiest. We need a trusted person to verify the
voters’ identity by email, website, or digital signature. The
trusted person will collect votes and publish the named votes so
anyone could verify the results.
For full nodes, we need a trusted person to setup a website as an
interface to vote. The votes with IP address will be published.
For bitcoin holders, the workload could be very high and we may
need some automatic system to collect and count the votes. If people
are worrying about reduced security due to exposed raw public key,
they should move their bitcoin to a new address before voting.
Double voting: people are generally not allowed to change their
mind after voting, especially for anonymous voters like bitcoin
holders and solo miners. A double voting attempt from these classes
will invalidate all related votes.
Multiple identity: People may have multiple roles in the Bitcoin
ecology. I believe they should be allowed to vote in all applicable
categories since they are contributing more than other people.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev [3]
