It should cost money to submit a Proposal or a Submission to a Contest. That will prevent spam. Jury must detect such submissions and reject them. Rejected submissions that costs money – there you have a mechanism. But you can suggest any other in your implementation.
The whole Free TON idea circulates around voting. This is really great and inspiring as I see the mirage of decentralization passing by dozens of blockchains is becoming real in Free TON.
As voting is very critical for the successful development of the community, imho, we better think of decentralizating the process itself too.
We have jury members (JMs) here and we plan to “recruit” more. Is it possible to automate the the process of choosing (JMs) before a contest?
Let’s say in an SG we gathered 50 people having the right to vote as a jury.
If we then have a smart contract that randomly chooses 15 from those 50 JMs to cast their votes in the nearest voting, we will have a much more decentralized way of voting than it is now. This minimizes tensions too but this one is a long story:)
Does this make any sense?
Can SMV cover this too or a separate contract is required?
That being discuss in DGO group and it even had a contest for that/ You are welcome to join the discussion.
This is not covered by this contest. It should assume there is a group of Judges it should just attache these groups. There should be another contract dealing with Jury group selection, management and voting.
Many thanks for the reply, I see now the idea reqires another contract. There some other details, don’t wont to go deep off-topic here.
Could you please direct me to DGO group, I am new here, now reading&discovering
Yes, you are correct, human factor is the main issue here.
I wouldnt like to go deeper into details in this proposal discussion, there are several points here and i have been reflexing on one them - removing human factor from selecting JMs just before a contest voting.
We already have JMs in different SGs and if we have a contract that automatically selects a JMs group from them randomly, imho, we go decentralized/trustless reducing the human factor to minimums and removing many reasons for tensions within community.
I suppose we better discuss this further in DGO group, maybe in a new discussion
Also because this is a big project but timeframe is very limited I am looking for other developers and Free TON specialists to join me in this project and share reward with me.
Please, find details in the repo.
We are going to develop this open source project publicly. So all commits, issues and pull requests will be available for community immediately. This will be kind of show. Be prepared!
P.S. I know Mitja could say it was his idea about public development but I decided to go this way on Friday. I was waiting for this contest proposal to be approved. So when I’ve heard the same idea from Mitja on weekly zoom on Tuesday I was surprised how similarly we think. And I decided to make announcement a bit earlier.
А что если сделать так?:
Создать своего рода одноразово платный мастер ключ для голосования в сообществе, в виде пароля. Один раз заплатил 100 ТОН кристаллов и получаешь членство в сообществе навсегда. Такой пароль можно получить лишь подтвердив свою личность с помощью верификации из трёх любых своих настоящих соцсетей и оплаты 100 ТОН. А за голосование будут списываться по 1 ТОН рубин, за голос или за пост на форуме, которые можно получить бесплатно.
Так мы избежим спам.
Правда для проверки соцсетей придется на ставку посадить человека (к примеру за 500-1000$/мес.) или несколько, а может придется разработать ИИ для проверки соцсетей. Мы же можем себе это позволить?
I have read several works from the top about the implementation of governance management and for my taste Mitja’s work is the strongest, but still not suitable as a PLAN. He honestly tried not only to describe the plan itself, but also how to avoid negative consequences. Unfortunately, along the way, he realized that the design of the system did not allow them to be avoided and began to justify the oligarchy and minimize the damage from such a development of events. At the end of the work, I felt as if I were in some kind of bazaar in Odessa.
I’m also surprised that this topic doesn’t cause any significant public resonance. At least here on the forum. That is fundamental issue and if it fails, the whole project will fail.
We don’t have meritocracy yet but merit-oriented community that will grow into meritocracy someday when we will follow the current course. And by proposed design meritocracy equals plutocracy.
Based on this, first of all, we need to answer fundamental questions like:
is plutocracy bad?
how to minimize the human factor so that anyone can blindly trust the system?
Consider, the statement that plutocracy is bad does not mean that the rich are bad. Especially if they are rich because they are talented. The question is how good it is for the society if smart people get the ultimate dominance over thus not so smart in any aspect of life? You know, ultimate dominance is very close to slavery. Ultimate dominance will be misused soon or late.
I feel myself a little bit like Vladimir Lenin on an armored car. But I am not pursuing any leftist ideas. I am rather for basic civil rights, for which I see a direct threat.