Post #19465

7fd587d7c5b2390bdff6962583e1b7d655f04c003a0db19cc8d49aeaa7d9b0ea
edef264b0af674e8d630132283b0e5d26a95667d013aee494bd8929eced78d26
Signature not verified

This entry might be using an old signature, or it was signed by a key that does not exist on the server.

{"entry_date":1568381273,"post_data":{"edit_count":2,"last_edit_date":1568381008,"last_edit_user_id":227,"message_sha512":"db1ad0476dd991e3dbb78f20dc74196b84e9fb79d9f3ca28c26e5d6af4427ef1a99b49a13365819168b51a2872dd38f5f52bf163eb02b2e42498c9e66b2f9453","node_id":52,"post_date":1568380700,"thread_id":2378,"user_id":227},"post_link":"https:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/2378#post-19465"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
ANO Election and Demotion System - Amendment proposal
[QUOTE="Niels Klomp, post: 19463, member: 8"]I certainly agree with your first point, but the second is not entirely true. From governance 001:[/QUOTE]
Yes Guides have a management/coordination role. These principles do not define by themselves the mecanics to apply this coordinnation role such how much standing, what decision can they precisely take... and this is what we are discussing and definings through all our governance discussions.


[QUOTE="Niels Klomp, post: 19463, member: 8"]Guides really are in charge of making sure we have 65 servers in the auth set as well as the expansion of standing parties (as defined elsewhere in the same governance). It is one of the reasons we have guides in this whole process of course.[/QUOTE]
I am fine and agree with that. Again I was speaking about decreasing the number of ANOs. Which is something with new potential risk and consequences for the protocol.


[QUOTE="Niels Klomp, post: 19463, member: 8"]But price alone for instance is not a good metric. We also have to take into account efficiencies. If everybody would go to 0% efficiency at 5 dollars for instance and our objective criteria would say we should be at X ANOs we are doomed as a protocol.
Guides are massaging entities into moving to higher efficiencies and doing more work from grants because of better oversight and better consensus on what, when and with what price. So my suggestion would be to tackle this thread in a broader discussion about the future roles of ANOs, as that will allow us to better define these objective criteria for ANOs.[/QUOTE]

Let us discuss this now ! :)
About your particular example, I was actually about to mention the proposal by Alex and Mike to consider efficiency in the calculation of the Standing. This would clearly resolve this issue. I did not make it to actually... separate the different topics.
What weight should the efficiency have?
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top