Good idea __________👍
My comment was about the idea to have a polling bevor the real polling.
What voting system will be used to rank the proposals?
There’s something to be said for Approval Voting (multiple choices) rather than Plurality Voting (single choice).
With respect to each proposal, the question will be the same: “Do you approve of this ZIP?” There are three answer options for each proposal: 1) Yes, 2) No, or 3) Abstain.
Could you open your PM’s please?
I have some ideas I would like to discuss about your proposal before posting them publically.
Did you see where your proposal was discussed on the live stream? here is the timestamp if you didn’t
Im steve, the tiger avatar and the vote of confidence from the chat.
Approval Voting? Seriously? When was this decided?
If i knew that it’s approval voting i wouldn’t have withdrawn any of my proposals.
Smart move, everybody that may support a 20% proposal can vote x times on all 20% proposals while someone for a lower dev fund has to stick to one proposal.
Readed the ZF article about miner voting and still some things are not very clear to me:
To be frank, we have low expectations that miners will participate. Various sources have indicated that miners aren’t interested in this process.
Which or who are these sources. I have a hard time to believe miners are not interested in deciding if their profit gets lowered or not.
We’ve received no response after many attempts to reach the operators of significant Zcash mining pools.
Which mining pools have been contacted? When have these mining pools been contacted? What was the message exactly to these mining pools. I advice beeing fully transparent here and publicly post all attempts with dates.
To do so, we ask that miners add an OP_RETURN output to their Zcash coinbase transactions between Saturday, November 16 and Saturday, November 30
I have no idea how this is going to work for a miner. This sounds/looks more like an option for the mining pool, but how is the miner going to do this?
I can tell you which and when, but I don’t have copies of the messages, 1) because it didn’t occur to me to save them, and 2) because some of them went through contact forms on the mining pool’s websites, that kinda thing.
I contacted all of these mining pools, using the official contact info listed publicly (which you will see noted below), a couple of days after sending this email:
We didn’t hear back from any of them. However, this evening I got an email from an unrelated miner who’s interested in participating, so that’s a good sign
Thx Sonya. Seems these are sent in time. Maybe it would be a good idea to make some Twitter posts and mention these mining pools with a message and description how the mining pools and miners can participate in the voting. There are some days left so a good campaign can maybe do the job.
Beside that, i think to remember that Zooka has good relationship with Bitmain and Innosilicon, or at least they have chatted. Maybe it would be another good idea to contact the bosses directly instead of using the support formular for these. As said, it doesn’t make sense that miners don’t have an incentive to have some interest in the outcome of the voting of dev fund proposals.
And last but not least, i have still no idea how the miners themself is going to vote. All i have readed so far and as far as i understand it, the process is more towards mining pools. And i have mentioned weeks ago that the mining pools don’t care about it as for them nothing will change, the provision for them will stay the same, no matter who the benefitient is at the end…
As with any proof-of-work system that suffers from mining-pool capture (which is all of them), if the mining pool is creating the block template (which basically all of them do AFAIK) then the actual miners can only vote by proxy. If a miner wants to participate in the vote, and the mining pool they use does not provide any way to do so, the miner needs to direct their rig towards another mining pool that does implement representative voting.
@str4d, thx for trying to explaining it, but i still struggle to understand it fully.
Let’s assume a mining pool has done this setup for representative voting. A block gets mined by let’s say 1000 asic units and 1000 miners and each miner giving his vote to this single block. How is the result generated at the end for this block?
Let’s assume the mining pool has done the setup for representative voting. Miners begin to vote. 1 Miner votes with his rig for 1 day, the next one mines/votes for the whole voting period. How is each vote counted in the result. In both cases 2 miners have participated and gave their vote but is the outcome (count of vote) the same for both?
What’s the mechanism against multi voting? As i don’t understand the whole miner signaling thing as a whole i could imagine that a miner could create several adresses or use several mining pools to vote several times or what is the mechnism to prevent this?
Some question i didn’t get yet an answer is how is the miner signaling counted in relatation to the foundation advisory panel and forum vote? Does each voting have the same weight or how is the final result from all these 3 voting possibilities formed?
IF there is no mining pool that participates in the representative voting, wouldn’t it make sense that the foundation has one temporary for some days to collect votes? IF no mining pool and hence, no miners participate, wouldn’t this mean automaticly that the whole voting and polling is flawed with a big part of the community not being able to participate?
Just some thoughts and question which in my opinion deserve answers if you don’t mind…
This answers most of your questions. The mining pool claims that they have selected that vote based on what their miners have indicated. One way they might do this is by having several mining API ports, that miners can connect (portions of) their rigs to. On the chain, all we see is the vote from the mining pool (or a spread of votes, e.g. they might mine X% of blocks with one particular vote to indicate X% of their miners supporting that vote over some time period). This is exactly how mining pool voting has happened on e.g. Bitcoin in the past. It’s also completely outside our control, and up to each mining pool to decide how they want to implement it (all we see is the on-chain result of the process).
One block, one mining pool.
It’s entirely up to the mining pool, but if e.g. a mining pool uses the API port idea above, then a miner can only vote up to the Sol/s they are running. Effectively one Sol/s per “mining pool vote”, which as above is a separate thing from the actual on-chain indicators (for which miners are trusting their mining pools to place).
I’d see this as an indication that a large majority of miners themselves don’t care about voting. Miners have a very strong economic signal in which pool they choose to aim their rigs at, and can very easily leverage this to penalize their mining pool for not participating in the voting. Thus if no mining pool at all supports sentiment sampling and representative polling, that’s a strong indicator that the majority of miners have chosen to not exercise their leverage, meaning that the mining pools had insufficient incentive to implement it.
I did think this might happen. If you want to reintroduce your proposals, just fork my proposal “keep the initial distribution as initially defined” and only keep the first requirement that the FR must stop, drop the second. Then put in what you want and call it a fork of my proposal.
I don’t mind doing it for you.
I think the point was since no pools were interested in the debate, as far as we could tell. (they might have been listening) There could be no pool that implements the voting aspect to their pool. This says nothing about the miners and only the pool operators.
That’s the point i wanted to make at the end. And as said allready, the pool operatators have the least interest of all in participating in whatever polling as their share will be the same no matter what happens, enough ZEC is mined by POW.
This said, it’s naturally the mining pools themself have 0 interest at all and this leaves the miners without any chance to vote for anything.
That’s again, why i suggested the Foundation should have done a mining pool at least for the voting period so miners could have a chance to submit their vote at least there.
It’s logical that the ECC/ZF doesn’t prioritize the miners for voting as their vote might be against a dev fund extension. And that’s the reason why i said, that if NO miner can vote at all, the result of the whole voting process is somehow flawed. Just my opinion of course.
If most miners do want to participate, and mining pools choose to ignore their miners, then I would expect to see either significant movement of mining power away from those mining pools, or miners complaining loudly about being ignored.
How can they complain about something they might not be even aware about?
I think we can assume that the biggest part of the ZEC mining operations are in china, former soviet republics and some other low energy cost areas. How many announcements have been made in chinese for chinese miners to participate in the voting? How many mining pools have made an announcement? Are there even announcement on our russian sub forum about it?
Just because we here, a bunch of western guys and girls discuss some issues here in English, doesn’t mean that the average joe chinese miners which live mostly in a total different world are aware of what we discuss here.
IF they are not aware about it, they are neither aware of the possibility of voting, nor of anything. And whith 0 mining pools so far offering a voting posibility, where should they move there mining power anyway even in case they are aware??? Can you name some major pools that participate in the voting process? I have my doubts you can!
This is true when I was gpu mining our country had local mining community forums in my language. None of them visited this forum I just lurked. And Im an Eastern guy
This is a very important point! I assume and hope that the Zcash Foundation is reaching out to educate and inform miners about the polling that the Zcash Foundation is conducting, in addition to reaching out to the mining pools themselves.
I assume and hope that the Zcash Foundation is reaching out to educate and inform miners about the polling that the Zcash Foundation is conducting, in addition to reaching out to the mining pools themselves.
How would we even do this, though? We don’t have a database of miners’ contact info. All we can do is spread the info publicly as far and wide as we can, and be available for miners to reach out.
Couldnt you contact ASIC manufacturers I am sure they are in touch with their customers? You could ask them to inform them of the vote for devfund. A green light from the miners would really be a white swan event nobody was anticipating.