Quote from: crypto123 on September 16, 2016, 06:11:04 pm (....)

We should be brainstorming new ideas regarding how we can drive up voter participation in the future, such as holding informal fun polls (favourite colour, community mvp polls, etc).



The Gridcoin network is also experiencing a lack of voting participation - only 1/7th of total vote weight votes which brings the validity of poll results mandate into question.



Why not give up the idea of ​​voting.

Maybe we should make the algorithm to vote.



Eg.

A candidate for the witness would have to meet certain requirements.

This is my suggestion:



The maximum possible total score to achieve 1000



The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.

The maximum possible score to achieve 300

we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents

(We need a developers discussion how to achieve it.)





The second criterion: proof of resources (computing power) and net speed

The maximum possible score to achieve 300

Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.





The third criterion: proof of commitment

The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA

The maximum possible score to achieve 300





The fourth criterion: proof of reputation

The maximum possible score to achieve 100

Points as a result of vote



The first (eg.) 50 candidates will be witnesses, and receives a salary.

The next (eg.) Of 150 candidates will not be witnesses and receives some less pay for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes



Quote

The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.

The maximum possible score to achieve 300

we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents

(We need a developers discussion how to achieve it.)



This seems tricky, could leave it out at least initially.



The second criterion: proof of resources (computing power) and net speed

The maximum possible score to achieve 300

Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.



Does this include latency? And what about taking server uptime into account? How feasible is it to measure these metrics? Well, latency seems straightforward. But what about the others?



The third criterion: proof of commitment

The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA

The maximum possible score to achieve 300



Maybe this should include missed blocks? And perhaps call this proof of ability or proof of work. Proof of commitment should perhaps be locking funds, no?





The fourth criterion: proof of reputation

The maximum possible score to achieve 100

Points as a result of vote



The first (eg.) 50 candidates will be witnesses, and receives a salary.

The next (eg.) Of 150 candidates will not be witnesses and receives some less pay for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes



This is really along the lines of a conversation that took place in Telegram yesterday (today for some people). It makes a lot of sense. I think the main thing missing is a bond i.e. locking away a certain amount of BTS in order to qualify as a witness. Some people said it should be minimum of 1M BTS. I'm personally not sure it should be mandatory. But I do think it should at least be part of a scoring system such as the one you laid out. Actually, come to think of it, there should probably be mandatory minimums for all criteria, and anything over the minimum raises the score. Anyway, I made a couple of comments next to some of your criteria (see comments in red below).By the way, i also like your idea of having some small pay for backup witnesses. I was talking about that in Telegram a week or so ago. Anyway, since you suggest they should get some pay, I assume they would be producing some blocks. If so, what percentage, maybe 5-10%? This would be a good opportunity for back up witnesses (or "witness candidates") to earn some reputation and perhaps prove he can reach some initial scoring thresholds.