On November 27th of 2016, we will be conducting our monthly Community Meeting on Lisk Chat. Join us while the Lisk team answers as many questions as possible from the community. Make sure to keep track of this forum post as the meeting transcript will be included once the meeting is over.
Following are some topics we would like to discuss with the community:
- Delegate Campaign and Proposal Contest
- Mainchain Stabilization Developer Update
- Network stability, scalability
- Next Steps in Development
Everyone is encouraged to participate, so if you have any detailed questions for us, please submit them to Joel (e-mail: email@example.com, lisk.chat: joel). During the meeting, we will address as many questions as we possibly can.
The meeting will take place in our Lisk chat, and will be held on November 27th, 2016 at 6:00 PM (CET).
Hello @all . Welcome to this months Community Meeting. As we announced in the last meeting we are now holding them once a month to get more community involvement. Today with us is @joel and myself. Our development team is working hard on the code right now, therefore it's better to ask all technical questions in the forum, the designated Lisk.Chat channels or to keep them for the next meeting. I hope you understand our current situation. The next meeting will be December the 18th.
Community Meeting Transcript
Today, we can proudly announce that we are working together with MME, the best legal firm in the world for blockchain startups, to establish a Swiss Foundation for Lisk. After a month of working together with them in which we prepared all necessary legal documents, we are now waiting for the final approval by the government. At this moment I don't know how long the final approval will take, but shouldn't be too long. It's definitely an exciting time for Lisk!
Since September we are working together with Nicoll Curtin, one of the best job recruitment agencies in the financial sector. Simultaneously, we are also searching by ourselves on various job pages like Angel.co or BerlinStartupJobs.com. Nearly every week we are talking with several interested developers and distribute front end / back end tests to candidates. Since the beginning we were planning to hire for January, not before. The reason is on the one hand the current development situation in which we definitely needed to concentrate on the Mainchain Stabilisation milestone and not on training new developers; and on the other hand due to the legal status of Lisk which is not 100% completed yet.
The candidates we currently have are promising and I'm looking forward to start working with some of them in January or soon after.
Our current efforts in promoting Delegated Proof of Stake, forging rewards and community forging start to yield results. By now we have 60 valid proposals in our forum for the contest. Many of them have great ideas and I think having 101 motivated, contributing community members will be a huge benefit for the Lisk ecosystem. viewforum.php?f=48
Here is an example press release we distributed with the help of WachsmanPR to get some attention. You will see more similar articles like that one next week. http://www.the-blockchain.com/2016/11/2 ... -community
Additionally, I just received an email from Liska. She worked on a short video explaining the basics of Delegated Proof of Stake and forging. Take a look, she uploaded it to the official Lisk YouTube channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoxCjFMor-8
This week we also announced the Community Fund which I was looking forward to since May. It will evolve into a decentralised funding vehicle for the Lisk community so that blockchain applications and community tools can receive proper seed funding.
Oliver and I donated the first 100,000 LSK to the fund. However, this is not enough! We strongly believe that over time the fund will grow both in LSK and USD worth, and that it will be a strong supporter of the Lisk ecosystem in the future.
Please, check out our blog post to get more information about the Community Fund. More details will be released in a much later stage, the fund is intended for the long-term while delegates, individuals, our bounty fund, and the Lisk Foundation (in establishment) should support the ecosystem at any time. https://blog.lisk.io/announcing-the-com ... 6b6948c633
Mainchain Stabilisation / Next steps in development
A few hours ago Oliver released Lisk v0.5.0f to Testnet which is yet again a big push forward. Besides fixing several issues during strong network usage (i.e. in a stress test) it now also supports an automatic recovery from fork cause 1 and 5. We will release this version with some small improvements to Mainnet before block 1,451,520 as we deem this version in general is excellent for our community to take over forging.
If you followed our GitHub closely (which by the way has over 1700 neatly described commits by now!) then you see that there are still 4% left for the Milestone Stabilisation milestone achievement. The reason is one last code contribution which has to come in a later update, which includes the rewrite of all database logic. This will be a gamer changer in terms of database performance across the board. It is quite a heavy change and requires some time to finish it.
During this step we will also start to draft and re-think our sidechain SDK. The plan is to re-use as many now existing parts as possible, however we will completely re-architecture the whole SDK. I can't give more information at this point about how we are going to re-architecture the sidechain SDK.
bangomatic: Hi Max, when community forging starts will you unvote all genesis delegates at once? @max
max: @bangomatic We will announce our strategy before the block kicks in. Very likely we will not unvote all delegates at once, but probably start unvoting them sooner, step by step.
liberspirita: will genesis delegates be unvoted on block 1,451,520
Gr33nDrag0n: @max I'm also interested to know when you plan to remove genesis vote. a bit before, same block ?, a bit after ?
max: @liberspirita @Gr33nDrag0n Very likely before that block.
bitbanksy: @max a question re: community fund: will this community fund work like a Decentralized Autonomous Organization fund but for Lisk projects only?
joel: @bitbanksy The fund is meant towards growing the Lisk ecosystem, but that will depend on the community itself. Once the curators are selected, they will act as the defining vote based solely on what the community has chosen to do.
cc001: @max can you describe the process in detail how and when you will replace the genesis delegates by the community delegates?
max: @cc001 We will make an announcement for that in which we will describe it in detail. Likely to be published tomorrow afternoon.
liberspirita: step by step before forging block?
max: @liberspirita Yes. If we have enough delegate nodes online before the block kicks in. This is of course mandatory.
Phoenix1969: any chance we can get the config.json merge implimented into upgrade script soonish?
isabella: @Phoenix1969 its already built into it
wannabe_RoteBaron: @max but the voting will take place after everyone will have chance to update in mainnet to 0.6.0?
max: @wannabe_RoteBaron Yep. But it's going to be 0.5.0.
bitbanksy: @joel or Max: are the current voting already made toward delegates be reset with 0.6.0 or will they stay as they are?
max:They will stay. However, again. The version for community forging will be 0.5.0. We were testing the release candidates which were: 0.5.0a, 0.5.0b, 0.5.0c, 0.5.0d, 0.5.0e, 0.5.0f. With f being the last update released today.
joel: 0.5.0 !
vi1son: How soon mainnet 0.5.0 will be released?
joel: Very, very, very soon.
iii.element.iii: @joel or max: At the moment around 30 million lisk are at the poloniex exchange. For my understanding that could be a risk to the network as it is a huge centralization of voting power. What do you think about it?
joel: @iii.element.iii The funds held by Poloniex are not theirs, it would be unethical for them to vote with such funds.
max: @iii.element.iii In my opinion it's bad, but not a problem. The 30M LSK are in a cold wallet and if they vote for it once, it becomes a hot wallet by design. The security measures and best practices by Poloniex should prevent this case.
Gr33nDrag0n:@max @joel about the proposal contest. It end December 5. Do you started evaluating them or will you start review on December 5? When can we expect the results of the contest?
joel: @Gr33nDrag0n The contest ends on the 5th, as in no more proposals get accepted for reviewing. We will take 1-2 days to review and announce the winners during the week.
max: @Gr33nDrag0n I will start reviewing them briefly before the community forging starts. However, for the contest itself I will do it on the 6th again.
reaper69: @max regarding the delegate voting, Is there some implementation ideas regarding nodes that dont forge after being added back to forging after a couple of times? like longer banning times?
max :@reaper69 No, because getting into the top 101 is quite a fluid process. It may happen that the 101st slot switches every few hours. This could yield some nasty side effects for delegates. However, maybe in the future we will think more deeply about this.
bitbanksy: @joel will the review be based on Lisk's team decision or community vote?
joel: @bitbanksy Good question! I'm thinking of making a new reward called "People's Choice" in which they get to select their winner. Although it's not implemented at the moment, and the reviews are based off the Lisk's team decision.
max: @bitbanksy We will review it. I think going forward delegates can start their own contests and competitions. I just saw that @lap uploaded a nice image above, this is a direction one of these delegate based competitions can take. However, I will talk with Joel. He had a good idea above.
hannah: @joel or @max : do you have any plans to incentivize people to withdraw their LSK from exchanges?
max: @hannah I think once the forging rewards kicked in and there are delegates who are distributing LSK to voters, more people will start withdrawing the LSK from the exchanges. That means it's part of the community to convince people to withdraw their LSK from exchanges. However, I think we as a foundation also have to be more vocal about this. Maybe we will run some campaign on it if the "problem" persists.
bawga: @max Do you meant that current sidechain SDK is ready for dapps if mainchain stabilisation complete?
max: @bawga Sorry if it wasn't clear. What I mean is that once the Mainchain Stabilisation milestone is achieved, we will work on the sidechain SDK. Check: https://blog.lisk.io/lisk-development-r ... fc4cd0612e after mainchain stabilisation there are milestones involving our App SDK / sidechain SDK.
cc001: @max @joel what is your opinion about Lisk pools (distributing forged rewards to the voters) ?
max: @cc001 I think it's great if we have a handful of such pools. Distributing LSK to minority LSK holders, giving them passive income etc.. However, if this becomes the "norm" (majority of delegates are such pools) I can see some problems with it. E.g. many small transactions on the network, less incentive for delegates to contribute. However, to be honest I'm not entirely sure how this would play out. I'm always optimistic and I think it won't be a problem.
joel: @cc001 I'm personally not against pools, since they will incentivize voting and spread the wealth. Although there are several scenarios in which they can turn out to be good, or bad. At this time, it's hypothetical and we will just have to wait and see what happens once forging begins.
vega: @max, replacing the genesis delegates step by steps makes sense but please consider personally not upvoting anyone until this process is done. it's better to just let the standby delegates who have the higest rank take their place. it's the more democratic, less centralized solution
max: @vega It's still a plutocratic process. However, we will have to see if these delegates are even online.
isabella: @max @joel what do you think about people only using a portion of their votes instead of all 101?
max: @isabella I think it's okay. Voting for 101 delegates is the best case and how it should be long-term, but can't be expected. I think it's more important in the beginning to vote for delegates who know what they are doing. Later there will be a wide range of delegates available and then people can start filtering and be more selective.
someonsomeone: @max How many LSK did the genesis delegates earn? Will those LSK be used for the community fund or for something else?
isabella: @someonsomeone this much lisk was netted by genesis, barely anything TOTAL FORGED (LSK) 33529.8
max: @someonsomeone It goes into the bounty fund. We announced it at one point, many months ago.
LSK: Are you happy that the governance and economic?
LSK: Sorry Max, phone problems. Is the governance structure going to prevent Lisk from being 'captured' by any particular vested interest group?
max: @LSK You are talking about DPoS as the governance structure? I think it won't get "captured" by individual interest groups, especially not if they have bad behaviour or intentions. However, they certainly can gain more power by buying up more LSK. However, the majority will in my opinion alway have more LSK than one group. So the majority should act accordingly to protect their investment.
vega: @max If you are determined to do it this way, then I think the main question is how long do you think this unvoting process will take? hours, days, weeks? an estamation it enough
max: @vega Extremely hard to estimate. Likely a day, depends how many community delegates are online/available. If we can't find proper replacement then we have to drag this on until we do.
reaper69: @max, sorry last question, is it still on the table to increase the 101 delegates one day or was this idea scraped ?
max: @reaper69 It's definitely still on the table to increase the number of delegates. It's heavily embedded in my mind and in my opinion a must-do. I won't forget it, but we have to do other things first.
someonsomeone: @max will you guys offer bounties for solving github issues?
max: @someonsomeone People who are regularly contributing with good code can expect to earn bounties, yes. We haven't thought about a system yet, the old plans would not have worked. It's quite difficult, because we can only accept very good pull requests. Nothing with bad quality. Therefore, the bounty won't be for every single contribution, but rather within a monthly bounty payout. (TBA)
reaper69: Glad to hear, Its something that I would support as well to make the network more decentralized
max: @reaper69 Yep. Please note that 101 independent, individual block generators is quite decentralised. If you think about it as "block generators" only, e.g. every Bitcoin pool is a "block generator" as well. And there are far less than 101. However, I agree with you. It would become more decentralised and secure.
someonsomeone: @max you can offer people to reserve one each issue each for one week max and if they don't deliver then the issue is available again to other devs As for good and bad pull requests, don't pay for bad ones and then people will be doing a good job sooner or later
isabella: @someonsomeone reserving might not work. people should collaborate on them instead
max: @someonsomeone Right now the issues are many and frequent, often very quick to fix. I think it's better to let our team do it for now. At a later stage they become less frequent and community devs can do solve them as well. However, as Isabella mentioned. I think "collaboration" is the key here. This would help us quite a lot. i.e. technical comments on GitHub.
joel: @someonsomeone Github Bounties for contributing do not make sense to me. Bug Bounties on the other hand do make sense.
brando: @Max what's the status on rebranding? I've missed any updates in recent weekly summarys
joel: @brando Not a priority at the moment.
max: @brando As Joel mentioned it's not our priority right now. We are working on it very irregularly, however after legal and hiring it has quite a high priority for me. So it's one of the things to tackle once the foundation is established.