| 3 Aug 2018 |
 @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] quite an interesting article | 23:49:31 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] "One major point of note: These large mining entities know that PoW won’t be their ace card forever. They’ve diversified with masternodes on various upcoming/existing chains, and have PoW/PoS agnostic pools for this very purpose to ensure their network effects and influence grows and/or sustains."
I wonder what that's based on. | 23:49:49 |
| 4 Aug 2018 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Haon] Seems like a wild guess | 07:14:00 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Haon] Bitmain is running Decred VSPs? | 07:14:18 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] yeah the article's quality decreased at around that point, I would guess pure speculation | 07:21:06 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*rxwH8acEiTMs3L7aebUPkg.png | 07:21:13 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] also this is "McKie’s Triangle for building sustainable blockchain-based communities.", it was defined, and heralded, by the author as significant or meaningful. It may be some deficiency on my part but I can extract basically no useful information from graphics like this. | 07:22:54 |
| @bridge:decred.org | Redacted or Malformed Event | 07:44:19 |
| @bridge:decred.org | Redacted or Malformed Event | 07:44:26 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Haon] "conjoined triangles of success" (edited) | 07:45:11 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Haon] It reminds me that successful projects strike a balance between community, marketing and development | 07:46:28 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] ppl love to define these dumb graphs | 18:40:39 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] then chart projects on them, so they can feel as though it's useful | 18:40:56 |
| 5 Aug 2018 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/bee] > for a lot of things, it shouldn't have to come to Voting on it
"You should really stop doing X now. You don't want me to put it to Vote, do you?" | 12:48:29 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] after discussing the decred clearance idea here several days ago, i'm planning to create a proposal about it once pi is in production on mainnet | 14:10:21 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] it's not something that we can resolve by discussion alone, and should require input from stakeholders | 14:10:57 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] i expect we're going to need several policy proposals of this type to be voted on before contractors can start making proposals | 14:13:40 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] sounds good | 14:42:22 |
| 6 Aug 2018 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/emiliomann] nice! | 00:46:21 |
| 7 Aug 2018 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] from @joshuam in #random https://medium.com/tezos/liquid-proof-of-stake-aec2f7ef1da7 | 12:42:35 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] seems relevant for here | 12:42:41 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] "But unlike in Bitcoin, in which miners capture all inflationary block rewards, Tezos delegates compete by sharing their inflationary baking rewards with delegators." - I've seen that referred to as bribery elsewhere | 12:47:38 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] I thought this was a nice article though, gave a good description of how baking and voting works, and established that Tezos differs to the other projects referenced in that delegation is optional "EOS, Lisk, BitShares, and TRON" | 12:49:28 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] Decred was omitted because the only mention of other projects was to a set of DPoS projects that the article wanted to differentiate Tezos from (EOS, Lisk, BitShares, and TRON) | 12:50:35 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/Richard-Red] I thought this was a nice article though, gave a good description of how baking and voting works, and established that Tezos differs to the other projects referenced in that delegation is optional (edited) | 12:50:42 |
| 9 Aug 2018 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/raedah] https://xkcd.com/2030/ | 21:51:02 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/raedah] oh, similar voting conversation happening in #random. Interesting to see the current popular narrative from xkcd. They are usually right on point. | 21:58:42 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] the msm are keen to give bad coverage to online voting tech b/c it would create a demographic shift in terms of who votes, meaning they would need to update their carefully-tuned brainwashing machines | 23:14:36 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] older ppl are far more receptive to msm/govt propaganda on radio/tv/internet | 23:15:30 |
| @bridge:decred.org | [slack/jy-p] this pattern of ppl acting nutty when it comes to online voting is msm cherry picking who they interview | 23:16:51 |
