Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Jake Bryan | The White Paper Coach
I had a great time talking with Max Gravitt, @gravitt12, of DigitalScarcity.io.
Kevin Wilcox
Inaugural EOS Alliance Board Retreat — Highlights and Recap - https://medium.com/@eosalliance1/inaugural-eos-alliance-board-retreat-highlights-and-recap-86b637a1d862
Email updates: http://eepurl.com/dFcvn9
Previous announcement - EOS Community Calls — Week 6 Schedule & Week 5 Summary: https://t.me/eos_alliance/5544
——————————
EOS Alliance - Empowering EOS For All.
Info and guidelines: https://t.me/eos_alliance/3897
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
Second Community Call with Amy Wan (Chair of EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group; Attorney; Founder of Sagewise) and Colin Rule. Call conducted in English.
Call is now being streamed live here:
Referendum:
¯_(ツ)_/¯ Doghouse
https://t.me/BallotCraft
Dear all,
We need to dive into the art of ballot writing for referenda. This affects almost all governance on EOS and until now has largely been ignored. If you have skill in this area please join the new group.
https://ballotpedia.org/Writing:Initiative_and_referendum_law
Note: In order to keep on topic Admins May be ruthless with off-topic hobby horses.
Branden Espinoza - EOS Supporter supported him:
Doghouse posted above, but I will echo: We are starting to pour some effort into an area that has largely been ignored, but will soon be important in the EOS ecosystem. Ballot/referendum proposal writing is an art. When the referendum mechanism is complete, EOS mainnet will be open for ballots/referendum proposals.
We are looking for a handful of individuals who would like to research and compile a best-practices guide for drafting good EOS referendum proposals. Anyone here interested?
Justin Buck
EOS has separated itself with the use of Ricardian contracts - seemingly to make the contract 'easily readable' to all members of the ecosystem. If this paradigm 'works' for standard contracts, could we use it for referendum proposals? Would be on-chain and 'easily readable' to the community.
Definitely could be way off base here, but my comment was in response to @dmargulies and @espinbrand where they say, "Ballot/referendum proposal writing is an art."
I would imagine a proposal acts much like a contract. If people vote yes, the proposal will be enacted, if voted no then it disappears. Anyway, since the EOS ecosystem relies so heavily on Ricardian contracts, could this paradigm not be used for referendum proposals too so that they can be 'easily readable,' like Ricardian contracts are supposed to be?
Again, could be way off base. Thanks
Josh Kauffman - EOS Canada 🇨🇦
I think what Branden means is that the wording should be as precise as possible. Voters need to be extremely certain about what they are voting for/against/abstaining from.
If things are not worded properly, you may end up with undesired outcomes (from the point of view of the voter themselves).
Also, Ricardians help to clarify intent of a piece of code. If we are writing a piece of English text and then saying "let's use more English text to clarify the first piece of English text" then why did we write the poor piece of text in the first place? And why do we assume that the second piece properly clarifies the first for everyone? The point of what is trying to be achieved is to "get it right the first time."
Ricardians aren't defined as being easily readable. But rather as being parsable by both humans and computers. Google the deep dive intro to them that EOS Canada wrote a while back
Justin Buck
Here is the link to the deep dive, if anyone else cares to read it. It's got good links and a video of T Cox talking about RC's. https://www.eoscanada.com/en/introduction-to-ricardian-contracts
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
Kevin Wilcox
First call of the week coming in 25 minutes, at 5:30pm EDT. We're comparing the last articles of Dan's constitution proposal with the current constitution - what should be changed and why?
Registration link: https://zoom.us/meeting/register/a3ac070a8f0cbc45cde7dc3c8da9331e
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
EOS Alliance - Constitution Referendum Series
Week 6 – Call #1: English Only
Livestream available here:
Kevin Wilcox
Call #1 has wrapped, an excellent discussion between 11 members in two groups. Some takeaways:
- Articles 8 & 9 in the Block.one proposal are straightforward and need little interpretation or change. v2 eliminates subjective terms from v1 of the constitution; participants in both groups agreed this is a good thing.
- An example of the language removed from v1 of the constitution: "Members may only publish information to the Blockchain that is within their right to publish" - groups asked, who decides that right? Won't that cause a lot of unnecessary dispute resolution cases?
- Language about "counterparts" was also removed in article 8 of the v2 proposal. Both groups agreed this was a good move, and to generally minimize unclear terms.
- Further discussion revolved around the need for a glossary or possible context documents to further explain potentially unclear terms and language.
Both groups came together in the final 30 minutes and had an open discussion about their overarching preferences in a constitution, and a yes/no question was put to all 11 members to gauge sentiment. Eight of eleven participants agreed the constitution should focus on intent of code, with clear enforcement measures outlined. Three participants abstained from the vote.
To wrap, a call was put out to the community - for anyone looking to draft candidate constitution articles, this group had a cross section preference for objective language, a focus on intent of code only, and enforcement measures outlined.
Video, starting at group summaries / open discussion (thank you EOS Detroit!):
Block.one v2.0 proposal: https://block.one/news/block-ones-proposal-for-eos-constitution-v2-0/
Dmitri Pro MEET.ONE
Great article, if someone disagree with it, will be glad to discuss it.
https://blog.goodaudience.com/the-eos-elephant-in-the-room-35fb9bd1e94?source=userActivityShare-d1c6356c0c06-1537940025
Susen MEET.ONE
Hello! Yesterday, the EOS account holding 2.09 million EOS had been stolen, community members and ECAF actively interacted with the victim.
Subsequently, the EOS Alliance convention discussion group called SpaceX actively discussed the event and launched a particular vote. Welcome to read this article.
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
EOS Alliance - Constitution Referendum Series
Week 6 – Call #2: Chinese & English
Livestream available here:
John
Why is it that "old news" is circulating around B1 staff and strong block? Who is the anonymous party saying the executives “left because we saw a need in the blockchain marketplace that Block.one was not going to address.”
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
EOS Alliance - Constitution Referendum Series
EOS Russia Constitution Discussion Call #3
Livestream available here:
Kevin Wilcox
Call #2 - Chinese & English is complete, possibly our most passionate group! Some notes:
- There are now 6 Chinese workgroups that have formed outside these calls to discuss arbitration and governance. Team SpaceX delivered a summary of their week's activities:
- They believe free markets can support arbitration.
- They prefer no default arbitration.
- SpaceX took a community poll: 290 of 360 respondents believe users have the right to choose whether they should be subject to arbitration.
- Small groups broke out to discuss the v2 constitution proposal. Group 1 said both versions of the constitutions fail to take local law into consideration. They recommend picking one jurisdiction and writing to that.
- Group 1 also discussed the importance of writing a constitution compliant with GDPR - specifically the right to be forgotten - businesses must be able to delete all data. Article 8 in v2 does not comply with GDPR, and this should be taken into consideration.
- During a poll of call participants, 10 of 12 agreed that some type of penalty or enforcement should be outlined in the constitution. Two abstained from the vote. Many expressed concern about rule violators currently doing as they please without punishment. Workgroup SpaceX will discuss this more during the week.
- Group 3 discussed solutions for article 9, which discusses 15% participation to amend the constitution. The group disagrees with stake weighted voting, where more money = more power, and brought an example of wealth taxes in many countries.
Call to the community from Chinese & English participants: a workgroup should be created to discuss the governance of SUDO (stands for "superuser do").
This is a contract being implemented that allows BPs to execute any action in EOS, including changing keys for accounts. If SUDO is implemented, what rules are BPs required to follow, and what is the punishment for violation?
Watch the EOS Detroit livestream, starting at summaries and SUDO discussion:
Group 1 also discussed the importance of writing a constitution compliant with GDPR - specifically the right to be forgotten - businesses must be able to delete all data. Article 8 in v2 does not comply with GDPR, and this should be taken into consideration.
What's the reasoning behind this? Isn't it impossible to create a GDPR compliant blockchain because it's impossible to remove anything from the blockchain?
During a poll of call participants, 10 of 12 agreed that some type of penalty or enforcement should be outlined in the constitution. Two abstained from the vote. Many expressed concern about rule violators currently doing as they please without punishment. Workgroup SpaceX will discuss this more during the week.
I'd like to remind people about the principle behind EOS governance: "EOS is designed to focus on restorative restitution rather than punitive retribution."
So, instead of trying to find a way to punish people we should be trying to find a way how to make them comply with the constitution.
Kevin Wilcox
Two of the Chinese workgroups are figuring out a solution to propose, it may be one of punitive punishment but they're still drafting. Everyone is encouraged to draft a proposal or collaborate on one that is relevant to their beliefs, so we can all have a robust variety of options to choose from
Samupaha
It would be great if we had a platform where to put all proposals and where to collaborate with others.
Justin Buck
Do you prefer it over the tool a bunch of bp's are building? https://medium.com/@generEOS/eosvotes-io-and-the-importance-of-a-referendum-contract-cf883398b283
Justin made a poll: Do you think subjective articles should be allowed in the EOS Constitution?
21% - yes
74% - no
5% - no opinion
(19 users voted)
Kyle - EOSVIBES
https://steemit.com/eos/@eosvibes/proposal-for-an-incremental-constitution-and-for-ecaf-to-be-removed-from-being-the-sole-protocol-layer-arbitrator-on-eos
Jetse Sprey EOS Amsterdam
My comments on both constitutions are in the google spreadsheet. I am not very enthusiastic to put it mildly. This spreadsheet got me started to write our version. It will be published shortly. Mind you: my comments are my reflections on the text. They do not elaborate on the articles that need to be in but are not.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fx9ZUR-QwLqEWT5hcA2zmTiUutX30bic1n-Dg9I9jBI/edit?usp=sharing
Manu
Could block1 place at least 1/2 of their votes to truly honest and hardworking bp's and sort out a bit of the bp's ranking?
Looks like top 15 bp's are going to be Chinese pretty soon otherwise
Looks like Chinese bp's are voting each other..soon other good bp's will move on
Kevin Wilcox
Yes, it's an open secret now that a cartel of BPs are probably voting for each other and sharing profits. It's more important than ever that good actors come together and draft next steps for dealing with this. This tweet thread summarizes the situation: https://twitter.com/MapleLeafCap/status/1044958643731533825?s=20
Manu
B1 delegating votes to good proxis would or could keep centralized accusations out and help fixing corruption ?
Sun Tzu
B1 is a software company that does not manage a chain. If B1 were to vote their dominating 10% it would challege their standing as "only software producers."
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Dramu
B1 need to support the good bps with their votes instead of letting whales play games
Sun Tzu
B1 is a software company that does not manage a chain. If B1 were to vote their dominating 10% it would challege their standing as "only software producers."
The holders of any EOS has rights to vote as per C, yes. However that's not B1. They have additional things to take care of.
pappamo
Give EOS holder a incentive to vote ala REX then the problem is solved.
jem
The entire history of EOS is B1 trying to raise a lot of money, keep it all as income, make sure that the token is not categorized as a security, and get the community to launch the Mainnet with no direct involvement from B1.
A key part of this story is that they had sufficient funding before the ICO to develop and deliver the software, so the ICO proceeds are pure income for a utility token which promised nothing. Indeed, the thing they sold, Ethereum ERC20 contracts, still exist (frozen), and B1 was uninvolved in the creation of EOS Mainnet tokens.
Everything they do beyond providing software puts that stance at risk. They are particularly at risk in the countries where they have people, especially the US and Hong Kong.
The more directly involved they become, especially anything which would use the 100M tokens which were gifted to them, degrades the stance, and gives ammunition to a regulator.
This is an ongoing dilemma for the company, and may contribute to the apparent disfunction business wise. Their new executive hires have been lawyers and asset manager types, and business development seems largely absent.
John
“The really interesting thing for a company like Block One is not to rebuild financial services on the blockchain, but to reinvent financial services.” - Our Group President Rob Jesudason on what is drawing C-suite talents from traditional businesses to blockchain.
-Dysfunction business wise!!!
@jemxpat is your new executive role in The Alliance anything to do with propaganda ?
Sharif Bouktila - eosDublin
Question for the floor : what would happen to B1’s 100m tokens should that company be split up , liquidated , sold etc...
At the moment the value isn’t significant relative to the funds they raised , but that ratio will change over time.
David P - EOS42
The tokens are slowly vesting into the account over a 10yr period. Whatever deal was made would need to factor that into its structure but there are a range of potential options.
Kevin Wilcox
Korean call #3 live - discussing v2 of the Constitution with v1. Join the call here: https://zoom.us/j/681379622
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
EOS Alliance - Constitution Referendum Series
Week 6 – Call #3: Korean & English
Livestream available here:
Sharif Bouktila - eosDublin
Just posted this idea
https://medium.com/@eosdublin/good-money-after-bad-b908368156b5
Jun | EOS Ignite
Gov Study group.. starting in 20 minutes .. discussing V3: https://www.crowdcast.io/e/eos-goverance-study-2
Joe
That could well be somebody's idea of how REX works but I personally don't like the idea of REX existing where the lender loses the ability to vote with their lent tokens. I described those concerns here: https://t.me/eosrex/8626
Friday, September 28, 2018
Kyle - EOSVIBES
As promised, here is the Whitepaper for EOS Talkchain.
We hope this project will help everyone (including the Alliance) better communicate, inform and engage with EOS token holders regardless of what timezone they’re in or what language they speak.
The aim of the project is to build and form consensus.
All feedback is appreciated.
Users gave their feedback about Kyle's whitepaper and shared their opinions.
Myra EOS Alliance
We have a Chinese working groups will organize a meeting. Welcome to join. Details as below.
Facilitator: Katherine of EOSBIXIN
Time: Beijing time Sep. 28, 21:00 (UTC 13:00)
Topic: 1) How to prevent the exchanges to vote with your EOS?
2)Should the exchange users be protected by the terms of the Constitution?
3)Should enforcement and punishment be added to the Constitution?
Join link: https://zoom.us/j/765838372
Language: English and Chinese
Our demands and concerns should be heard.
Susen MEET.ONE
Hello,everyone！
I'm Susen from MEET.ONE, today I will lead a group discussion.Our Group name is EOS Alliance Consititution-Helios.
The topic is how to promote EOS Constitution among the community. Education and promotion is vital,but how to do that better?We want to hear your ideas!
The zoom meeting start from Sep.28，12:00 UTC to 13:00 UTC.
Here is the link: https://zoom.us/j/431683976
The meeting is for both English and Chinese language,welcome to attend our discussion！
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
This call is being livestreamed here:
Myra EOS Alliance
Another call start right now
Facilitator: Katherine of EOSBIXIN
Time: Beijing time Sep. 28, 21:00 (UTC 13:00)
Topic: 1) How to prevent the exchanges to vote with your EOS?
2)Should the exchange users be protected by the terms of the Constitution?
3)Should enforcement and punishment be added to the Constitution?
Join link: https://zoom.us/j/765838372
Language: English and Chinese
Our demands and concerns should be heard.
Livestream for this call available here:
Philip - EOS Detroit (eosdetroit.io)
Community Call with Amy Wan (Chair of EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group; Attorney; Founder of Sagewise) and Dr. Anyu Lee. Call likely conducted in Chinese, possibly English. Friday September 28 @ 1400 UTC. Livestream available here:
Jetse Sprey EOS Amsterdam
We proudly opresent our EOS Charter (A.K.A. Constitution v 3) for community consultation. Looking forward to all of your comments! The press release and the links are found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d-o6SdhuUkyl5BRkE7OGBnDT2sth19oYCErHQE_nD5o/edit?usp=sharing