Good evening to everyone . I hope you all are doing good .
Source
Today I would like to address a problem that everyone knows about and is talking about currently .
POB is one of the most unique tribe on Hive ( well every tribe has its own uniqueness ) but POB tribe became popular right from early days and we right now have an opportunity to continue making it more popular or just throw it all away by doing nothing.
Important issues that needs to be addressed
Right now @proofofbrainio isn't as active as other members of the community . I understand that he/she/they might be busy in their real life but in that case delegating the tasks to other trusted members of the community will help things move in the forward direction .
There is lot of energy within the community and lot of important discussions are happening in the tribe . Be it who should be muted or who should be unmuted , who should be downvoted , what should be downvoted etc . There is so much drama going on which needs to addressed .
Tribes aren't decentralized in any way . It gives power to one person and that person can change the fate of all the community members ( with respect to token earnings ofcourse ). If we see POB to be a million dollar project in future ( like LEO team believes in their token ) then we must focus on instilling confidence in the investors . So instead of just stating " I trust in the founder , let him do what he feels is right , I stand by him" - let us change it to " I believe in the founder but I believe in decentralization" .
The founder should just be an enabler according to me if you want to increase the confidence of investors . The founder shouldn't be allowed to take decisions according to his discretion , he must listen to the community to every decision and take the decision that community approves .
I am sure there are more issues which needs to be addressed but right now the above mentioned issued are of priority to me .
How can we make POB decentralized ?
This is what I will focus on in this article .
I saw another post by @vempromundo about POB governance . It is a good start but what we need is to focus on the "tools" which enables good governance and not just the rules .
We gotto make sure the rules are enforced.
- The article mentions 5 people in the council discussing and coming to a decision "together" .
The idea would be the consensus, thinking about solutions until they reach one that the five agree on
But that doesn't solve the existing issue -
@proofofbrainio isn't active so if all the 5 has to discuss and come to a conclusion together then the other 4 has to wait till he is free and okay to discuss .
We have to find a way for decisions to be made without him . How ? I will explain it below .
- Art. 3: For greater ease of dialogue with small members without representation, each member must be from a different country.
I personally don't like representatives of different "countries" .
POB is a global community , we are here because we are like minded people . Go to STEMGeeks you will find all people who are interested in Science , Math etc . Go to LeoFinance you will find users who are interested in crypto and finance .
I am here as a representative of other like minded people and not as a representative of my country .
What is the need to segregate and choose based on Country ?
I like other country users post than my own countrymen so I obviously support and protect their concerns .
I am from India and the userbase is very small , so even if I have good ideas for the community , I can't be in the council because I don't have countrymen supporting me ?
The selection criteria for the membership should be based on "Understanding of tribe , decentralization , tokenomics , marketing , onboarding , programming skills , Public relations , governance" and not country .
Let's say we have 5 brilliant people on POB who have contributed a lot but they all come from 2 different country , so you aren't gonna place them in the council no matter what their contribution is because they are from same country ?
I never built an app or built a service to service my own countrymen . Everyone here is the same , they talk about various different topics which affects us all and binds us all so when we aren't providing the service ( service in the form of posts and content too ) to our countrymen there is no need to protect "country or regional" interest .
I love Hive and LeoFinance and POB because I have made friends from all over the world , please don't segregate based on country and we might people start fighting what is good for their own country , it's not good . We are a global community , remember it .
Coming to my suggestions.
ARCHON Style of Governance
Firstly I would like to mention this -
Is it perfect and solves all problems ? No .
Is it a step in right direction for decentralization ? Absolutely yes .
What is it ?
It gives the power to the community members . If we adopt this to POB , then
- Anyone can create a proposal on anything ( right from buying tokens from market using @pob-fund to transferring ad-revenue to developer )
- The proposal will be passed if 51% of the POB staked accounts vote on the proposal and majority has voted for yes .
Example: Let's say we decide to buy POB using ad-revenue but @proofofbrainio is busy . I can start a proposal for this using ARCHON style of governance .
Users will have 7 days to vote . Let's say 100000 POB is staked overall then
- Accounts holding 51k POB together must vote for the proposal to be valid . If say 200 users who have staked 10 POB vote , the proposal won't be passed because their stake isn't enough .
If 51% of the users have voted for YES then "automatically" during the post payout the code is executed and the action is taken . I repeat that it is all automatic so even if @proofofbrainio disappears we can continue making proposals and passing them .
Does any other tribe use this ?
As far as I know - ARCHON and SPORTSTALKSOCIAL uses this type of governance .
Has anyone used it before ?
Sure , I have used it myself on Sportstalk tribe to pass my engagement project .
55% of overall Sports staked voted and 95% voted for YES .
Here is the proposal - https://www.sportstalksocial.com/hive-101690/@amr008/proposal-fund-my-sports-engagement-project
How to enable it if community decides to adopt ?
Then the founder must talk to @taskmanager who is the developer of this wonderful system . I will help him with this .
Check this post to see list of what we tasks can be done using ARCHON governance
Multi-signature
The first suggestion from my side is ARCHON governance , second is Multi-Signature.
Hive supports multi-signature .
We talked earlier that there should be a 5 member council and they will discuss and come to decision collectively . Now how can you make sure the decision is taken collectively ?
Let's say I am one of the member and I just sell POB from @pob-fund on market and vanish ?
Or say I transferred everything to my own account ?
I know many of you might say " We must trust them: but not all big investors agree with that , they don't trust anyone and they don't have to . We have to utilize the systems and tools which enables everyone to work together without need for ultimate trust , ofcourse some amount of trust is necessary but not too much .
Is there anyway to prevent this ?
Yes , Multi-Signature solves this problem .
Let's say we have to enable multi-sign for @pob-fund account then what we can do is - we can give 25% power to 4 accounts ( or any other percentage to any number of accounts ) and we can set the threshold for any activity as 75% .
What does it mean now ? That means 1 user cannot make a transaction , 2 users also can't make a transaction . Only if 3 users agree to that particular transaction then it can be passed.
Note that the 4th member isn't even required here , so even if he disappears or is inactive for 5-6 months it won't matter .
We can set threshold to 50% too if we just need 2 users to agree for a particular activity .
We can have upto 40 accounts for a particular role if I am not wrong .
All this cannot be implemented and shouldn't be implemented tomorrow itself , this is just for discussion .I am just trying to make the community aware of the tools and resources we have currently to make POB decentralized . If users find it interesting and benefits POB then the founder can take the further steps .
This post became lengthier than expected . In coming days , I will give a demo of how multi-sign works for those who need practical explanation and also I will give a demo of ARCHON governance as I plan to start a proposal on SPORTSTALKSOCIAL soon .
Regards,
MR.
I think this a great idea that we should refine and implement. I don't want to run the community. I want it to succeed, but I honestly don't have the time to properly run it myself, so this sounds like a great direction for the tribe.
Happy to hear this .
Now to see it implemented then some others of us will be happy too and not just a backroom council he picks out :) It should imho be as AMR008 said, the community with stake to vote on and multi-sig.
We shall see, thanks @amr008
upvoted full power because I appreciate you wanting this community to succeed, and decentralized governance is the way to make it succeed... upvoted fully to help with your rep.
I have a couple of things to ask here.
I like this. Promoted.
i dont , cause then it gives yall all the power , dont suck the big guys dick
Thank you for the promotion @onealfa .
Great ideas, so how do you create a multi signature account?
Hey flaxz . We can't create a multi-sign account but you can turn any account into multi-sign .
Check this out , you will get an idea
https://hive.blog/steem/@holger80/multisignature-transaction-guide-for-beempy
After reading that if you have any doubts , let me know I will respond here .
That is a really great guide for setting up multisig, thanks a lot for sharing, now as I see it there is one big obstacle of using it for governance namely Scotbot as it needs active authority to issue or pay out token rewards, when Hive-engine comes out with a smart contract to replace Scotbot then it would work great though, I will keep this in mind for that time, enjoy your day.
!ALIVE
You Are Alive and have been rewarded with 0.1 ALIVE tokens from the We Are Alive Tribe, and it's paid for by the earnings on @alive.chat, swing by our daily chat any time you want.
I edited my publication, keeping the revoked ones crossed out, based on everything I understood
cool, yeah I think some things are centralized enough with countries and some of their voting patterns no? Glad you are seeming to be on board that this is a community decision and not a special council one and on multi sig.
Great post with a lot of good and useful ideas, @amr008.
Most of the risk in a tribe is the issuing account, for example proofofbrainio. This account cannot have multi sig due to limitations of Hive-Engine and Scotbot.
Using it on PoB-Fund would be a good move, but it only can protect what is put in it, right now it has less than 18K POB, most of the POB is on proofofbrainio (129,000 POB). It also has access to the rest of the 21M unissued tokens as well as the ability to drastically change economics of the tribe and the token.
For me, if I was highly concerned about things, my concerns would be with the proofofbrainio account as that is where most of the risk lies. For this to be effective, most if not all of the stake from proofofbrainio needs to be powered down and put into pob-fund. This account has a massive amount of inflation due to early bird snowballing and 10x voting for 49 days until that voting power was fixed. This stake is promised to be 100% for proposals only. I honestly can't see that much stake ever being used for proposals unless ProofofBrain aggressively starts to onboard outside of Hive. This is a problem every tribe has and even Hive and no one has figured this out or made any real effort in it.
While anything done to decentralize a tribe or any blockchain project is good, I think we talking small potatoes here as it really doesn't fix any of the real concerns. It will help create a more decentralized DAO and that's not a bad thing I just question how much it is really needed and will be used.
Interesting though, all this talk about decentralizing POB more, but at the same time demanding more centralization by creating rules and dictating what people can and can't do with their stake.
Just my $3.58, it was two cents, but inflation is a bitch these days.
It doesn't have to fix a problem, it only has to be popular with the crowd.
If the price is any indication of that, it is losing popularity as we watch.
Your content has been voted as a part of Encouragement program. Keep up the good work!
Use Ecency daily to boost your growth on platform!
Support Ecency
Vote for Proposal
Delegate HP and earn more
Excellent ideas, and other tribes should take note of them as well!
This is awesome @amr008. I would trust the 'code' more than a 'human' and infact many investors would.
We need to automate this system as much as possible. Like a DAO but I am afraid the option with tribes is limited. The above solutions you mentioned seem viable to me for now.
It's a solid approach to a lot of problems. Thanks AMR for presenting it.
I love this, music to my ears everytime discussions are going on.
The proposal idea is great and is quite what we already have. Turning the pob-fund account into multisign is also great.
I'd like to ask though, is there any difference between your ideas for proposal voting and what @proofofbrainio says in his last post that went like this:
The major difference is it is all automated .
Right now @proofofbrainio has to calculate the 50% stake and all which might lead to some mistakes too ( human error can't be ignored ) but the ARCHON governance automates everything and calculates everything by itself .
Ok, this bit about automation is great.
But something isn't so clear. Is it that total votes (whether yes or no) must be up to 50% of Stake? Or is it that the individual options must have up to 50% votes to pass like 'yes' must have up to 50% stake votes to pass and 'no' must have up 50% stake votes to pass.
See
Ex: Let's say totally 100 accounts have staked 1000 POB .
So in order for the proposal to be valid 510 POB staked accounts must vote ( if this is only 2 accounts then also it will be valid )
Remember , here too the 50% is based on POB staked . So
Ex2: If 600 POB staked account have voted , then 300+ POB staked account should have voted for YES for the proposal to pass .
This was exactly what I needed to hear. Not only for the future of POB, but also because SkateHive is about to launch our own tribe, and how to govern it together is very important. I will be following to see how this develops, and hopefully applying the lessons to our work on SkateHive.
You are right . This need not just apply to POB , it can be implemented ( should be implemented if you ask me ) on any tribe .
This does sound like a viable approach... I actually had no idea that multi-sign was an option.
I also really appreciate the idea of voting on major issues that directly affect a community... although, of course, many tribes/communities tend to be "top heavy" in terms of stake holders; something I once saw addressed by setting a ceiling on how much any one person's vote would count for... something like "your actual stake up to a maximum of 10,000 HP" or something like this.
Of course, no system is ever perfect...
=^..^=
Totally agree with this but that's something we can't prevent . We also can't say 1 vote = 1 vote irrespective of amount of POB staked because that would lead to abuse of the system .
Yeah maybe this is a good approach . We shall see how this develops :)
Oh wow Excellent ideas, and other tribes should take note of them as well! You are doing well keep up the good works.
Very good @amr008
Although I want to wait for the next steps here this week... But your proposed ideas please me and go to an interesting line of reasoning to be used in POB.
My idea is that he is not one of these 5, that way he can continue his absence and the community can live without him
The requirement may be another one, open to suggestions
My intention was not to segregate, if it sounded that way I apologize
I really liked this solution
About ARCHON Style of Governance and Multi-signature
I really liked these solutions and I believe that as the admin commented on your publication, he is seeing the discussion, so we can already start the adoption process, or at least raise the yes or no votes for now.
Please don't apologize . It's all right .
I just don't like country as a criteria for council that's all .
This is great.
I know Hive can do multi-signature but I can't say I know this about Hive-Engine.
Even for HE transaction you can use the multi-signature because it also needs active key .
Anything that needs keys will follow same Hive rules .
I just want to get this straight, this isn't a replacement of @proofobrainio right? Just some one to stand in for him.
Please let's make it crystal clear, power can sometimes be possessing. So that anyone who is chosen or voted wouldn't have intentions of over ruling.
Besides I guess proofofbrainio hasn't really made an official statement he won't be here. Were there times he was absent except for the last week drama issues? Just need some clarity
Hello @feyifavor . Thanks for airing your concerns .
This is to decentralize the tribe and in no way to "replace" @proofofbrainio .
Will it take away certain powers from him ? Yes for sure it will but will it be beneficial for the community ? Yes .
No matter who is chosen , the founder will still have a place .
No he hasn't but here is the comment he has made on this post -
Thanks for the enlightenment
You have touched on some really great points and created a wonderful argument with a great example. Well done.
Amazing I loved these ideas. And I think it would be best to give a Kickstart to POB.
Valid point, 100% agreed, it defies the whole spirit of decentralization.
Regarding Archon Governance
Its better to replicate and reiterate what's already present and has worked, than creating something new altogether. Any solid governance plan will take a couple of months of trials and errors to come into affect and be efficient.
While we keep working on something new, its not at all a bad idea to implement this, not tomorrow but as soon as possible. Most of the chaos around is because of lack of governance, its the very first thing that needs to be sorted out and we can work on rest everything else afterwards.
I do had a few concerns, but some of them have been sorted in the comments already. Still what concerns me is -
What if the capital structure changes? It might sound unrealistic but what if a single individual holds a very significant stake that can influence. Or suppose if two people holding 25% each collaborate. These may not be the immediate risks but these are some questions we need to ask and find answers going forward with this. Does that mean anyone who have a couple hundered thousand dollar lying in their basin can overthrow the governance?
I liked this idea anyway. And I believe this should be processed asap. Some proven governance system is better than no governance system.
Congratulations @amr008! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 15000 replies.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThis is great, having people from across the world supervising the community will do a lot in the growth of the community, in these case if one is being partial they rest stands up against him or her since they are not just one group who knows each other from the same country.
It would be very good if there are at least one or two representatives from each continent.
well stated....if the person had a track record of earning trust that would have instilled it but now there's a "council" with no community input? YOUR idea of every stake holder having a say is way better than backroom drama where we're supposed to be okay with no multi-sig after someone moved the community funds from the 10% 'tax' to their own account with zero community input. I tried to warn of this as did former admin that wanted their hands clean (including myself) and quit our positions after finding out of the total lack of communication. It doesn't help when the person who has ALL the control over the funds YOU ALL entrusted can't be bothered with simple biz chats I suppose...unless it's in a backroom? Is that it?
Also saying you don't give a fark about biz and just want fun and seem to not care but dip in once a week then leave for everyone else to do your work is plain lame. I back what this post is saying and have NO doubt that once all the fun rules are passed we will see how much everyone is loving the centralization that some of us are not okay with.
The fact some who are on the esteemed but totally not community "elected" council stayed quiet while a few of us have asked and been dodged for months on BASIC biz questions speaks for itself.It's about EVERYONE not just what happens in a backroom or funds moved or even asking how much the ad revenue is. If you ask "how much is the ad revenue" as a potential investor and are basically told to FUCK OFF and that even extends to people who did free work then that's not good.
MULTI-SIG, YES, but again who's going to have it and does the community trust them. Again, I find it odd that in all the "drama" many stayed silent so a few could take some slings and arrows. If there isn't multi-sig especially after funds were moved to a personal account then just a bunch of noise then there are quite a few who aren't going to just power down, they are prolly gonna dump. This could have been avoided ages ago but people who have remained silent on basically really bad biz moves, that's on them.
When the leader moves the biz funds all of us gave to his personal acct with no talking to the community except to berate them then run off and say he doesn't want to run a biz and just wants fun and then curses at people who point out stuff like malware then....shrug, where were the rest of the upper people demanding things? Oh that's right, backroom centralization is the name of the game except for what @amr008 is logically proposing. If there is no multi-sig and accountability on who is gonna be in charge then am guessing there's a lot more drama to come or people will make alternatives (and they are).
Archon style of bust....op/ed
Let me politely ask a fundamental question to you @amr008
are any of the above rewards worth the post?
Is this post worth 466 POB? Assuming 1 hive = 1 POB; that is about $116. Is this post worth it?
If I feel, I disagree, what would you suggest I do?
Do you agree or disagree?
The fundamental problem with this tribe is that you don't have a niche, and you don't have any governance and reward distribution is highly lopsided. There is always dumpster fire in your discord. There is people coming out of there screeming for help. There are admins leaving, saying they will leave, untaking, staking again. Things are all over the place! Does any of these gives anyone any confidence? I have been telling this for a while, if you don't fix this immediately, there is little improvement you can have.
how to get POB quickly cos I find difficulty to make quickly?
I only skimmed over it when posted and came back now.
Hmmmmmmmm, multi-sig... I think I need to work this into the governance system, and offer it up to the tribes using it....
Wheels are turning in my brain.
The council would have to enable governance (each signing authority to the server account), this would also allow them to veto a proposal by removing that authority though, but a tribe owner already has this power if they wanted it with the current system.
We could even set it up so a proposal requires 51% voted, and a pass result, and X amount of council votes.
May as well add in a council system separate from proposals (but still using POB Governance Power) to vote in (or out) council members....
This is some quality idea here @amr008!
I ended up taking a long time to read your publication, but regardless I must say that I found your suggestions for improving the POB's governance system to be excellent and I approve of it 100%. I sincerely hope that it will be read/heard by the current governors, for us to have as soon as possible a quality daily care in here and that this avoids this feeling of "unimportance", the POB has a lot of potential, but as long as this structure is fragile, we will not see the propulsion that we could have. When you need it, you can count on me.
I have dedicated myself to Pob above any other tribe and I will continue to do so, as long as the project remains in place.
@amr008. The King is taking awhile to absorb what this all means. However, the kingdom likes the idea of decentralization..... He also was not aware of the drama associated with this particular part of the blockchain. Understanding others and their concerns are important anywhere we travel to/from in life. As always, we appreciate and value your feedback as you have created successful projects on the blockchain, @liotes.
Many thanks and the Kingdom sends....
!ALIVE
You Are Alive and have been rewarded with 0.1 ALIVE tokens from the We Are Alive Tribe, and it's paid for by the earnings on @alive.chat, swing by our daily chat any time you want.
