Chain Parameter Change Proposal 2-24-2020


Change the Chain Parameters

Name 20200224-chain-params

Category Chain parameter change

Initiator attero-tusc

Param changes

Voting ends 2020-03-07T06:00:00, 6 am 7 Mar 2020 UTC, 11pm 6 Mar 2020 MST. If vote passes changes go into affect 1 hour after voting ends.

Proposal ID 1.7.3

Two parameter changes are being proposed to the TUSC blockchain. We are seeking community feedback on these two proposed changes before committee members vote. Once community members have a chance to provide feedback the on chain proposal will be created and the rest of the information above will be filled in. 

There is a parameter called committee proposal review period. The person that creates a committee proposal chooses when the proposal will expire. If it has enough votes to pass when it expires then the proposed changes will be made. Committee proposal review period controls the amount of time immediately before the proposal expiration when voting is locked out. This gives the community time to evaluate the votes of the committee members and vote out the committee members who voted for the proposal if they don’t want the proposal to go into effect. Currently this parameter is set to 1 hour. This does not allow adequate time for anything to be done during the review period. By changing the parameter to 1 day much more time is allowed for consideration of the proposal after all of the votes are locked in. 

The second change is to the worker budget per day. It is currently set to 5 million TUSC, the proposal is to change it to 10 million TUSC. There is a lot of activity going on around TUSC currently. The way to fund all of this activity is through the daily worker budget. TUSC holders can vote for the workers that they want to support and the workers with the most votes get their worker proposals funded until the daily budget runs out. In order to fund development and marketing activities at a faster pace we are proposing to double the daily budget. It is possible to vote for worker proposals that return the budget to the worker fund rather than paying it out if there are not 10 million TUSC worth of worker proposals that a voter wants to support. 

Tagged:

Comments

  • Thanks Ben.

    I support both changes.

    1. I think it’s a good idea allow to allow more time for the community to review committee proposals before they are implemented.
    2. Now that we are launched and growing, more people will be contributing to TUSC, and we need to be able to pay them.
  • Agreed with Rob.

    I support both changes and ReadyRhino will vote to accept them. I think the review time is important for increasing the opportunity for committee involvement, and the increased worker pay will allow us to move more quickly with getting new contributors.

    Thanks to Ben for putting this write up of the new parameters together :)

  • I support both of the proposal, and both of them are needed.

  • I also agree that both proposals will be beneficial for the future development of TUSC.

  • edited March 3

    I have created the proposal. It is object 1.7.3. You can see the object at this address: http://elasticsearch.tusc.network/object?object=1.7.3. Look for available active approvals to see who has voted for the proposal.

    To determine if the proposal is currently passing or not go to this address: http://elasticsearch.tusc.network/object?object=1.2.0. Each committee member is listed under account_auths. Add up the weight below each committee member. If that total is greater than weight_threshold (290,589 as of 2 Mar 2020 10:00 pm MST) then the proposal would pass if voting ended before any votes were changed.

    Committee members: use this command in the cli_wallet to add your approval:

    approve_proposal <account paying fee> "1.7.3" {"active_approvals_to_add" : ["<committee member account"]} true

    You can use the same account for both, you must have active keys for both accounts to successfully execute the command. To change your vote change "active_approvals_to_add" to "active_approvals_to_remove"

    Let me know if you have any questions.

  • votes. Thanks Ben, for setting that up.

  • Glad to be part of tusc as a member, showing activities like this proposal , development and upgrades make things quite better for future references.

  • 🙏🏼

Sign In or Register to comment.