Flare improvement proposal blog post

[Seoulite]

 

[Eric123]

How is everyone voting on this?

[Gringo]

 

[Eric123]

Brief scan of the twitter feed looks like Yes is the popular choice.

[Gringo]

Quote

Brief scan of the twitter feed looks like Yes is the popular choice.

If you put the property of a specific group into "vote" for a larger group and ask if that property should be distributed to "everyone", then yes, it becomes "popular".

Anyway, that's also the nature of the State and Democracy (organized violence).

[Panopticon]

The real question is do you trust them when they say Hugo and the rest will have no voting rights?  I doubt it...

 

Edited January 13 by Panopticon

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Panopticon said:

The real question is do you trust them when they say Hugo and the rest will have no voting rights?  I doubt it...

 

I thought they made it clear that Flare Network can vote. Only Flare Foundation can’t vote.

[PunishmentOfLuxury]

50 minutes ago, Ripley said:

I thought they made it clear that Flare Network can vote. Only Flare Foundation can’t vote.

That's my understanding too. Which means Flare Networks Limited will get whatever it wants, with all those billions of votes. I've been saying the founders' allocation is suspect for years, but no one seemed to care back when they had $$$ signs in their eyes.

[Seoulite]

 

[henne111]

I vote yes. Without discussion.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Ripley said:

I thought they made it clear that Flare Network can vote. Only Flare Foundation can’t vote.

I hate that’s Hugo puts it this way. To me this feels disingenuous. This is not the first time he used these exact words. Everyone has their 85% effectively locked away. No one is voting with them. Everyone is only voting with their 15%. 

What people are pointing out is that Flare’s 15% has more than enough votes for FIP.01 to win. Yes it is their product. I think they should do what they think is right for their product. I am personally okay with pivoting from original XRPHolder-centric distribution. They don’t “owe” anything to anyone and XRP Holders got two airdrops of 15% anyway. It’s a good compromise. But this isn’t really a vote. It’s guaranteed to win. You need > 75% to say No, which cannot happen because of Flare’s votes.

I get their problem. They were in trouble either way. If they change it without a vote, community leaves. But they need this change done for the long term growth (in their opinion) of the network. It’s a PR issue once again with Flare.

I think the more important thing to focus on is that until Flare’s non-escrowed tokens are fully dumped on to the market, they can have any future proposal go exactly the way they want. Voting won’t matter. That said, this is not a Flare-specific issue. Most, if not all, “DAOs” have this issue. It’s centralised under the name of decentralised. It’s for participants to recognise and be aware of.

[Seoulite]

43 minutes ago, Ripley said:

I hate that’s Hugo puts it this way. To me this feels disingenuous. This is not the first time he used these exact words. Everyone has their 85% effectively locked away. No one is voting with them. Everyone is only voting with their 15%. 

What people are pointing out is that Flare’s 15% has more than enough votes for FIP.01 to win. Yes it is their product. I think they should do what they think is right for their product. I am personally okay with pivoting from original XRPHolder-centric distribution. They don’t “owe” anything to anyone and XRP Holders got two airdrops of 15% anyway. It’s a good compromise. But this isn’t really a vote. It’s guaranteed to win. You need > 75% to say No, which cannot happen because of Flare’s votes.

I get their problem. They were in trouble either way. If they change it without a vote, community leaves. But they need this change done for the long term growth (in their opinion) of the network. It’s a PR issue once again with Flare.

I think the more important thing to focus on is that until Flare’s non-escrowed tokens are fully dumped on to the market, they can have any future proposal go exactly the way they want. Voting won’t matter. That said, this is not a Flare-specific issue. Most, if not all, “DAOs” have this issue. It’s centralised under the name of decentralised. It’s for participants to recognise and be aware of.

I don’t have much problem with the team changing the way the token is distributed. Look at the major cryptos in the beginning, the early sales and escrows and pre-mining. This is par for the course. I understand people who are upset if they sold. But honestly because the price has crashed lower than it ever was, they can now buy back with profit if they want. They haven’t been left behind.

Also you might get slightly less of the free thing that you were promised. Forgive me for not being enraged about someone reneging on a free offer in the first place. 

It seems the vote will pass with or without Flare participation, because basically any whale who has been accumulating this last year will vote yes. Anyone who is buying right now is probably voting yes. The ship is already sailing in the other direction but a lot of xrp people still think they can turn it around. The days of flare as a “utility fork” of xrp are long, long gone. In fact it may be strange now to even talk of the two as linked in any meaningful way.

[Gringo]

[JASCoder]

Anyone knowledgeable on how FTSO's price postings are evaluated for their accuracy determinations ?

The awesome Dev "ShortTheFOMO" posited :

Quote

FTSO’s don’t vote on price they vote on the price that earns them rewards. Why is a price oracle not a price oracle. May as well been voting on the temperature in a random location.

In my FTSO ignorance, I mused...

Quote

Aren’t the reported prices validated against the traded prices immediately following the postings ?
Using consensus makes less sense than what the actual markets execute

In layman's terms, just how are the price-postings judged for their accuracy awards ?

[Seoulite]

24 minutes ago, JASCoder said:

Anyone knowledgeable on how FTSO's price postings are evaluated for their accuracy determinations ?

The awesome Dev "ShortTheFOMO" posited :

In my FTSO ignorance, I mused...

In layman's terms, just how are the price-postings judged for their accuracy awards ?

It’s been a while since I read about all this stuff but as far as I know, all the price signals are collected and then the top and bottom 25% of the range is excluded and the middle 50% rewarded. Basically it is a consensus price, and presumably the idea is it would require near impossible collaboration between many many providers to radically deviate from a “realistic” price. For example if one provider suddenly claimed that XRP was 100 dollars, their price would just be ignored.

AFAIK analysis shows that the FTSO price tracks very very well with the prices on major exchanges. We have a year of data from Songbird and it has worked well.