From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA7D5BD6 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 19:39:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ua0-f173.google.com (mail-ua0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20EED19A for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 19:39:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua0-f173.google.com with SMTP id 96so19119066uaq.3 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:39:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=NUxTb8fmbHXkGY1eWrL+W4m8erN6Cb+QWUcDQWVyuvI=; b=bwsOGxPsXeyGI6PEQXyUsntfJ6jR/99n8XVLO0VCUaO/fORQDgYd94KUjD5y/2aU6C 6SaDyErhDjDGIhDYiN5j43KUOaWN7yaQ4hVTE8VKjatyeebd3ABKp74VX5lQFuBEI3XS nd2owLXOFGdeso6GSqzNHbi5EN87OC/9f76hcdmdEZIydd/LXTmmkyzI8kS4uIwK3vTI La946UlIhJZ2DQynUfGA8IJZ/KNGL6tBpRHZ7XS9qcoK/mk6v2DG+gIOKKMTurFNi2uE syVTLOxrST2obg133pQ/lJZwT4Ov3YbIj0gVg/Ne0PZf0cAcfuRhSwGMq2CxS+BHXfw/ uURA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=NUxTb8fmbHXkGY1eWrL+W4m8erN6Cb+QWUcDQWVyuvI=; b=GqUvKWaKgh26hP012JbjL26XXR8my+HsJTwnm9ZPKyRcHjv/5KyywqF85otSxTca2y aT2xHbVIy6f/g5ba6xpV5FVZPWmwZRQ/HfMgdRDLrik9YLp5gei7zfhpZUtn5vCAej8O EcFIxnFhPJm2sgh+jmO5OXQ706PGo+BRNhf9JPkwPf/eevHlZcxxD7LJFsBFOHPo6qAC wWfKZuF3yrT1ja6mCsGda1FQpxYFb1agvgrgGIyOHraWPAt+5e0jK7dqMKf8JdJQrWIE Ib6SjC/OsLPzYTXY6F8dzsFQ5sSg585Y334msOBxOXkCr/jiFvEXwndq4QSMnuLIW7hB vM1A== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKvKvJ0dmRgwPlH0BTH7y3Ln6iWmtNV5kEdw4rjPGXqwTk+3AH1TJcso0UNfpHqJCd/VhcFkCs/S8mZiA== X-Received: by 10.159.36.73 with SMTP id 67mr5162436uaq.124.1486064391888; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:39:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.49.77 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:39:51 -0800 (PST) From: "t. khan" Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:39:51 -0500 Message-ID: To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e1c9c3125470547915491 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 22:58:12 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Community Consensus Voting System X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 19:39:53 -0000 --001a113e1c9c3125470547915491 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP. Thanks, - t.k. ---------------------- BIP: ? Layer: Process Title: Community Consensus Voting System Author: t.khan Comments-Summary: No comments yet. Comments-URI: TBD Status: Draft Type: Standards Track Created: 2017-02-02 License: BSD-2 Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDGDTmZvkE5Uuwh8 (just an example, don= =E2=80=99t send to this!) Abstract Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS) will allow developers to measure support for BIPs prior to implementation. Motivation We currently have no way of measuring consensus for potential changes to the Bitcoin protocol. This is especially problematic for controversial changes such as the max block size limit. As a result, we have many proposed solutions but no clear direction. Also, due to our lack of ability to measure consensus, there is a general feeling among many in the community that developers aren=E2=80=99t listenin= g to their concerns. This is a valid complaint, as it=E2=80=99s not possible to = listen to thousands of voices all shouting different things in a crowded room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the Bitcoin community today. The CCVS will allow the general public, miners, companies using Bitcoin, and developers to vote for their preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99s publ= ic and relatively difficult (expensive) to manipulate. Specification Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is added to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by sending a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP's address. Each transaction counts as 1 vote. Confirmed Vote Multiplier: Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core maintainers/contributors are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is worth 10,000x a regular vote. For example: Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then states publicly (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails the URL to the admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will count as 10,000 votes. Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitFury, etc., all do the same. Confirmed votes would be added to a new section in each respective BIP as a public record. Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a particular block number is mined. Rationale Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twofold; it gives a larger voice to organizations and the people who will have to do the work to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will negate the effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedly. Definitions Miner: any individual or organization that has mined at least one valid block in the last 2016 blocks. Company using Bitcoin: any organization using Bitcoin for financial, asset or other purposes, with either under development and released solutions. Developer: any individual who has or had commit access, and any individual who has authored a BIP Unresolved Issues Node voting: It would be desirable for any full node running an up-to-date blockchain to also be able to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But as this would require code changes, it is outside the scope of this BIP. Copyright This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license. --001a113e1c9c3125470547915491 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Please comment on this work-in-progress BIP.

Thanks,

- t.k.

----------------------
BIP: ?
Layer: Process
Title: Community Consensus Voting System
Author: t.khan &l= t;teekhan42@gmail.com>
<= div>Comments-Summary: No comments yet.
Comments-URI: TBD
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 2017-02-= 02
License: BSD-2
Voting Address: 3CoFA3JiK5wxe9ze2HoDG= DTmZvkE5Uuwh8 =C2=A0(just an example, don=E2=80=99t send to this!)

Abstract
Community Consensus Voting System (CCVS= ) will allow developers to measure support for BIPs prior to implementation= .

Motivation
We currently have no way of= measuring consensus for potential changes to the Bitcoin protocol. This is= especially problematic for controversial changes such as the max block siz= e limit. As a result, we have many proposed solutions but no clear directio= n.

Also, due to our lack of ability to measure con= sensus, there is a general feeling among many in the community that develop= ers aren=E2=80=99t listening to their concerns. This is a valid complaint, = as it=E2=80=99s not possible to listen to thousands of voices all shouting = different things in a crowded room=E2=80=94basically the situation in the B= itcoin community today.

The CCVS will allow the ge= neral public, miners, companies using Bitcoin, and developers to vote for t= heir preferred BIP in a way that=E2=80=99s public and relatively difficult = (expensive) to manipulate.

Specification
Each competing BIP will be assigned a unique bitcoin address which is adde= d to each header. Anyone who wanted to vote would cast their ballot by send= ing a small amount (0.0001 btc) to their preferred BIP's address. Each = transaction counts as 1 vote.

Confirmed Vote Multi= plier:
Mining Pools, companies using Bitcoin, and Core maintainer= s/contributors are allowed one confirmed vote each. A confirmed vote is wor= th 10,000x a regular vote.

For example:
=
Slush Pool casts a vote for their preferred BIP and then sta= tes publicly (on their blog) their vote and the transaction ID and emails t= he URL to the admin of this system. In the final tally, this vote will coun= t as 10,000 votes.

Coinbase, Antpool, BitPay, BitF= ury, etc., all do the same.

Confirmed votes would = be added to a new section in each respective BIP as a public record.
<= div>
Voting would run for a pre-defined period, ending when a= particular block number is mined.


= Rationale
Confirmed Vote Multiplier - The purpose of this is twof= old; it gives a larger voice to organizations and the people who will have = to do the work to implement whatever BIP the community prefers, and it will= negate the effect of anyone trying to skew the results by voting repeatedl= y.

Definitions
Miner: any individual or = organization that has mined at least one valid block in the last 2016 block= s.

Company using Bitcoin: any organization using B= itcoin for financial, asset or other purposes, with either under developmen= t and released solutions.

Developer: any individua= l who has or had commit access, and any individual who has authored a BIP

Unresolved Issues
Node voting: It would b= e desirable for any full node running an up-to-date blockchain to also be a= ble to vote with a multiplier (e.g. 100x). But as this would require code c= hanges, it is outside the scope of this BIP.

Copyr= ight
This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license.
--001a113e1c9c3125470547915491--