Tbh first thing to address is 100% or more payments. Especially if leasers always need to release they gonna swap even more faster to 100% or more paying nodes. Bringing the overal profit from all nodes together down.
I agree 100% payouts are hurting the Waves ecosystem but how do you propose to counter this in a decentralized manner?
What’s the costs right now to pay out 150% for new nodes? a few dollars a week .
The only decentralized solution is profitability, if revenue increases it will be harder for nodes to pay out more than 100%.
RE 100% payout, don’t really see a solution for this right now. Running a waves node is too cheap I guess
One important thing you forgot when leasing, you can choose the automatic or manual cancellation option, I will only come back to this proposal if the user has the choice of automatic or manual cancellation, otherwise it will be disastrous, and we don’t want inflation, inflation i will erode the platform slowly in 20 years we will be in chaos if the inflation feature is approved
my node https://waves.one pays 100% of what it earns forging blocks for leasers! what is the problem?
the main goal has always been decentralization
If you want a cash machine go to the mint and print colored papers!
if you think this is a sustainable approach you definitely don’t understand how decentralization works, a safe network can’t rely on altruism.
which is why node owner should invest in waves as well and use node not only to support decentralization but your own services should be built upon your node. So that way you earn fees from your own stack and will use network to generate more transactions.
Because off nodes paying 100% or more, other nodes who aren’t fanboys(sorry if i offend someone) will never have interests to run a node. A company makes profit, don’t they make profit on something, they cut it out.
Firstly not have centralised games like GON.
Where some nodes as idiots make big promisses to gain even more leasers.
I understand you, but for now it is profitable for me, if for others it is not profitable then they will close and make room for others that may work, and (words do not offend), thanks for your explanation.
t this WEP contradict a regular blockchain logic, where state changes only happen as the result of some transaction? Activation of this WEP will lead to a situation when the system state will change due to the transaction that happened two years ago, that may lead to quite unpredictable results (especially to smart accounts). Otherwise, if you think it is ok - it is better to add suchcron
tasks to the level of the smart contract language and implement on the level of a smart contract language (e.g. by default when user makes a lease, it also creates acron` task to cancel this lease after some user-defined time)
How can paying 100% be profitable to you?
Just lease own funds to your node, and - surprize!
And how is this more profitable than leasing to another 100% paying node? Since you pay for your hardware / renting VPS / electricity / internet access and invest time in managing it.
100% payouts hurt the ecosystem.
I agree, but I not know its is the best solution. I explain:
The problem is actual power of vote on something is node owner, and this not reflecting necessarily real feelings of investors (fundamental part of any project) and this cause a mistake as a false impression of governance, and in this case only tradisys try solve this gap. Seen this point this proposal asking for owners nodes vote in anything remove his power of vote, and like can see on comments before a lot of they not care with investors who sustain ecosystem, only with himself exclusively, even with governance characteristics, and is more paleative methodology for a existing methodology of governance and creating uncomfortable and frequently actions for lessors, the real investor of waves where would be have the power of vote in accordance on his investing on waves, in this sense, as inicial solution for governace I agree, but only like a temporarily way, I every will have in mind that power of vote need to be of investors and not node owners, results will be more fair for all. Lessor decide results not node owners, big investors not vote to lose money, who have big investment have better perception of what wants.
Wrong, big wrong, lessors not is a customer, nodes is a customer, without lessors investors node owners have nothing, is with a fraction of lessors rewards nodes maintain up, then nodes is the client, review your concepts.
Of course nodes know what wallets lose seed/private key getting rewards and not want lose this extra benefits, anyway, the guys is right, even node owner not know what wallet have lose seed/key rewards going to dead wallet, is waves in trash, what it is good for health waves platform, instead lessons sharing the reward, grown interested is on trash.
Because I have waves rented to my own node, ie I have (skin in the game) different from other nodes that have no waves.
So here is my friend, I will answer you with a question, why are there people who run full nodes of bitcoin (without receiving anything in return)?
Where Bitcoin use nodes as stak? Bitcoin only is proof of work.