You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: RAC versus TCD: Case study 1
Probably the main factor is to get the right ratio of 'balance' to 'magnitude' as far as voting weight is concerned. We don't want all balance because then a few really rich people could totally dominate voting. This would be much more difficult to achieve if magnitude has significant weight, since a huge mining infrastructure would be required (especially once the Gridcoin network grows to rival the largest national supercomputers, which it probably will). We also don't want all magnitude because large investors should get at least some say in the future of Gridcoin, even if they don't mine.
Currently, the ratio is 70:30 balance to magnitude. This seems to work OK for now. Maybe there's a better answer though if we did more analysis...
I completely agree. Do you have some ideas about how we could analyze it, i.e. variables, etc.?
I've wanted to look into it myself but I decided to focus on other topics for now. Some solution to that problem could be implemented by a specific way for ranking projects (still don't know about that myself though), or maybe some other way, but I'm not sure what all the variables are.
On my to-do list! I have some ideas, but still need to flesh them out.