Excellent job, I hope people realize the vision of this plan and what it means for everyone in the game if that vision gets fulfilled!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Excellent job, I hope people realize the vision of this plan and what it means for everyone in the game if that vision gets fulfilled!
Yes, very promising, but at the same time this statement worries me a little bit:
I hope players spread their votes on many different validators, also smaller ones. HIVE is already way too centralized, I hope Splinterlands won't follow this example!
This is a common misconception about how DPoS systems work. The top voted witness/block producers/validators do NOT have much real power in the system. The staked token holders ultimately have all the power. If the top voted block producers or validators do anything that the token holders don't like, they will be voted out very quickly and lose any rewards they were making from being in the top.
The decentralization in a PoS system comes from the distribution of the tokens. The more distributed the staked token supply is, the more decentralized the network is, and vice versa.
I appreciate that you take the time to reply.
Concerning HIVE I think one of problems is that ...
... the block producers are the main token holders (or at least some of them) and in addition they are (at least as I personally perceive it; while I am aware that not everybody will agree here) a - more or less - homogenous group which supports each other mutually since the foundation of STEEM.
I agree that in Splinterlands the number of big token holders is much higher than in HIVE and not all are so closely connected to each other like the HIVE witnesses, so that this might lead to a higher degree of decentralization.
Furthermore, I gladly admit that I still need to read the whole concept of validators more thouroughly and gather more information to be able to build myself a clear opinion on the matter. Experience tells me that normally your projects are well-conceived, and in case of doubt I am optimistic that it will be the case also this time. :)
That doesn't matter - even if the main token holders aren't the block producers, they can change that in a second. This is what happened with the Steem hostile takeover. It didn't matter that Steemit, Inc was never a witness - they controlled the stake so they controlled everything.
So what I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't worry too much about who the top voted validators are or how many, and should focus much more on the distribution of the token, which I think both SPS and HIVE do a pretty good job with especially compared to a lot of the other networks out there.
OK, that's the deciding point, I agree, and right, SPS is distributed rather diverse (there was for example no early mining etc.).
A sufficient number of validators to guarantee enough safety of the network (enough nodes) is reached by the option for everybody to buy licenses to run a node ... I still need to read more about the details, but am looking forward to see how things will finally work out.
As always: thanks again for all the time and hard work you are investing into the success of Splinterlands!
I like you.
;-)
I'm looking at it in the same manner. I hold a bit and might have a little sway, but already know there is a circle that would overpower any chance I would have at being a 'top validator'. Maybe, idk, got a few guilds going and could might pull it off, have to see more specs yet I suppose.
My view is that was the thinking of making the vast majority of the payout (90%) not based on votes received. I agree that it should not be concentrated in just a few player's hands and I'm sure it will be more spread out than HIVE. I believe the DEVs also understand the point you made and why they made this work out this way. How many I don't know, but I think the "relatively small number" was versus the eventual 60,000. So whether its 50 or 100 or more I don't know, but I doubt it will be 10 or 20.
do you really believe that? i think the basic idea is good, but we have seen often enough in the past what happens when whales have a say behind the curtain, just look at the tournaments as they were before weirdbeard arrived. unfortunately, many people, especially when they can still act in anonymity, are terribly greedy egoists whose pocket is more important than the game or anything else!
but I am curious and hope that I will be surprised
@bronko I think you are missing that the ownership of the vast majority (90%) of the validators have NO impact on governance. Only the validators voted on by the staked SPS community will have a bearing on the way things work going forward. This reward will be a much more modest 10% of the total and you will likely now get people that are community oriented (vs greedy egoists) in charge of protecting the community.
The reason I like this is the incentives to run a node for anyone is pretty much the same (with a small bump for the top few), so now people will vote for who helps/protects the community the best instead of worrying about those people being corrupted by the money they are earning.
Plus I love the vision of where they think this will go. If those nodes are ever worth $40,000, then I think our minds will be blown! :)
yes right, I also meant not the possession but the complete system, who has the greatest voting power^^
and if the side where you vote is also hidden for the majority, such as the current feedback page. then the problems will only focus further, I think!
I fully agree that everything should be out in the open, and I'm sure the votes will be on the blockchain and everything will be visible and probably easily attainable from 3rd parties too.
most people dont know what a VN is or what it does let alone why we need them or how to set them up. the info gap is wider than the financial gap in the game. and youre 1000% correct the lack of open info for the masses holds the whole community back imo