NEM Node Rewards (please give feedback)

General Discussion
#61

I would need to have an average upload speed of 200kB (Kilobyte) = 1600kb (1.6 Mbit), right? Why so high? Is there a special reason?

How are ping times measured? Will there be several nodes distributed over the globe and the best result is kept?  How do you care about latency because of physical node distance?


1) We want to have a fast network where syncing doesn't take days. 1.6MBit/s is not very fast. VPSes are usually a lot faster.
2) The result for ping times as well as the upload speed are done from a node that is as nearby as possible, e.g. if your node is in europe, a european node will be the partner for testing, not one in Japan.
#62


I would need to have an average upload speed of 200kB (Kilobyte) = 1600kb (1.6 Mbit), right? Why so high? Is there a special reason?

How are ping times measured? Will there be several nodes distributed over the globe and the best result is kept?  How do you care about latency because of physical node distance?


1) We want to have a fast network where syncing doesn't take days. 1.6MBit/s is not very fast. VPSes are usually a lot faster.
2) The result for ping times as well as the upload speed are done from a node that is as nearby as possible, e.g. if your node is in europe, a european node will be the partner for testing, not one in Japan.



Thanks for your fast response  :)


1.) VPSes are a lot faster, I'm sure, but my home internet conncetion is not and will (probably) never be able to reach such speed. But I fully understand your point.
2.) That's perfectly good!
#63

Hi,


my Feedback.
The proposal is Okay[font=Verdana][size=78%]. I assume that we could latter adapt rules with knowledge we gain. [/font]
[font=Verdana][/font]
Anyway 3m XEM is to much for me to can run a node and take advantage from node reward system, so I will shut down my node at the end of this month. Currently I have about 400k XEM and I like to buy about 400K (about 60

#64

Yes, this thread is the reason he removed his work.  It was kind of sad to see the other side of him.  He did make a lot of good things, but you are right in that it is best to know for sure where everybody stands and why they stand there.

#65

My 2 XEMs - every solution will be bad. If you set a high amount to run a node there will be just no nodes. If you set a low amount there will be a mess of ridiculous virtual zombie-nodes. Every amount will be too high or too low so this is not a way.
Solution? Look to history of current nodes and invite the people who have already run them just from enthusiasm and interest, choose the nodes that has been running for a longer time.
AND then you can also invite someone else who will jump on node-bandwaggon just for profit.
If you just set only a high amount as a barriere, people already running their nodes will feel betrayed and tricked. I dont think making XEM depending on few rich whales who will sell their share and close the node when they decide that there are better investments, is the best idea.

#66

what the guy above said makes a lot of sense. Put all the people running nice performing nodes since the beginning out of free good will in the program.

For the rest and newcomers, anything above the size of an original stake makes no sense (2.25M), just put 2M cause round number is better and be done with it.

Time to move on, this thing is taking too much time  :slight_smile:

#67

I think that is a very interesting idea.  That is something we need to discuss, but I kind of like the idea that people who have been running nodes for a long time could get a pass.  The reasons the deposit is being instituted doesn't necessarily apply to them. 

#68

My 2 XEMs - every solution will be bad. If you set a high amount to run a node there will be just no nodes. If you set a low amount there will be a mess of ridiculous virtual zombie-nodes. Every amount will be too high or too low so this is not a way.
Solution? Look to history of current nodes and invite the people who have already run them just from enthusiasm and interest, choose the nodes that has been running for a longer time.
AND then you can also invite someone else who will jump on node-bandwaggon just for profit.
If you just set only a high amount as a barriere, people already running their nodes will feel betrayed and tricked. I dont think making XEM depending on few rich whales who will sell their share and close the node when they decide that there are better investments, is the best idea.



This is a good proposal. I would reactivate my node in this case. I started a node shortly after the release of NEM just out of [font=Verdana][size=78%]enthusiasm. [/font]
[font=Verdana][/font]
[font=Verdana][size=78%]FireF[/font]


[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]PS[size=78%][/font]
[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]At the moment I try to use punk rocks nodes. [size=78%][/font]
#69

I don't see insufficient balance as a big hurdle in node rewarding program.

People can team together to reach 3M XEM. Multisig can make it safe and funnier than doing it on your own.
Let's behave like a community!

I have about 5M XEM on my main account so I need to find a way to use that 2M spare XEM…

#70

Put all the people running nice performing nodes since the beginning out of free good will in the program.

For the rest and newcomers, anything above the size of an original stake makes no sense (2.25M), just put 2M cause round number is better and be done with it.

Hm, it's an interesting idea to allow all the node owners which ran a node till now without reward to participate in the program without a desposit. Maybe for a limited time? Or maybe with a lower deposit amount?

Downside is it makes the whole program even more complicated.
#71

Depends how you want run that system.

You can run NODE rewards for 2 reason
1 -get new people on board
2 -generate microeconomy

1st is small harvesters are getting small reward this is good for newcomers

2nd is some NEM are requied to run NODE that way you generate economy inside nem this is good rewards should be like
100k-500k NEM 10% maks reward
…
4m 100%
NEM lvls should be adjusted
or we can roll one guy from every NEM ammount range.

***
Give people who run NODEs some % of fee (and let people chose intrest rate 0.1% to 40% price will be auto adjusted free market here) that way we can promote higher quality nodes runned 24/7 by 365 days year
at end we create economy arround NEM
***

or next idea
reward will progress with NODE network
that way lets say 5% of all nodes are allways getting reward
it should generally work like that
more nodes = bigger NEM price better dystrybiution of NEW nem entering market
less nodes = cheaper NEM (high cost of VPS will turn off them when they are not profitable) and that way we are self adjusting all time
no matter if market cap is 1m$ or 100m$ with price rise network is rising and we are improving wealth distybution asswell.

some resonable NEM ammount should be required depends on NODEs number becouse with nodes amount will come price and we want more people IN so IMO  amount of NEM requires should be adjusted at end.
lets say we want people who parcipitate to invest ?? 100$ ? 200$?
100Nodes 3M NEM
1000Nodes 0.3M NEM
10000Nodes 0.03M NEM
100000Nodes 0,003M nem

#72

Those are very well thought out ideas and are all things that will have to be considered as the program goes forward.

#73

Hello NEM community, I wanted to throw in an idea for you all
The problem is multi-faceted and it seems the best way to not only ensure further and wider adoption, but to also step away from centralization at the same time would be to have a scaling system of diminishing returns.
You can even add a time component piggy-backed off the vested balance.

A very large problem with most crypto communities is that they really only cater to their early adopters, relying on a very unstable market to generate their growth.

So how do we incentivize new nodes, while not alienating the pillars of the community?

I propose rewards are base on to factors the newness of node and the holdings of the node
So to clarify, running a node would first be rewarded as a function of time vs the number of active new nodes - these would get  % of the fee reward (probably a larger %) This would decrease after say 6 months? At which point a node would become vested.
All the vested nodes would then get the other % of the reward pool which would be divided among them based on their holding and vested level, longer vesting = > % over time. 

This eliminates the pump and dumpers and many of the social aspects of who is running the nodes and for what purpose. It now places the nodes on people who truly support the technology on multiple levels and not just a $$ and also the people who are curious about the technology can become involved, gain XEM, and be even more incentivized to stay not only running their node, but also more inclined to utilize the currency as time is the only factor determining their accumulation - not holdings in the beginning.
This also creates an entirely new market for vested node's.

If the payout is a function of the number of nodes on a network than the system also becomes resistant to people just continually starting thousands of nodes as their ROI would drop with every node they open as those nodes wouldn't be generating tx fee's .

#74

Hi :-)  it's a little hard to understand.

"I propose rewards are base on to factors the newness of node and the holdings of the node
So to clarify, running a node would first be rewarded as a function of time vs the number of active new nodes - these would get  % of the fee reward (probably a larger %) This would decrease after say 6 months? At which point a node would become vested.
All the vested nodes would then get the other % of the reward pool which would be divided among them based on their holding and vested level, longer vesting = > % over time."

Can you give an example of how this would work out with amounts of nodes and payouts and deposits and all that so its a bit easier to fully understand? 

#75

Apologies I'm very very new to NEM I may have got excited and spoke up before thinking :), I will try to reason this out because as a rather recent crypto enthusiasts I see one of the largest hurdles to adoption as growing the userbase while growing the nodebase without alienating future interested parties.

I will update this later with a real numbers example when I get some time to pull them from the blockchain

#76

Apologies I'm very very new to NEM I may have got excited and spoke up before thinking :), I will try to reason this out because as a rather recent crypto enthusiasts I see one of the largest hurdles to adoption as growing the userbase while growing the nodebase without alienating future interested parties.

I will update this later with a real numbers example when I get some time to pull them from the blockchain


We are glad you are here.  And especially glad you are contributing. Sometimes really good ideas come from newbies with a fresh perspective because they can see things in a different way.    ;D

So yes, when you can please maybe fill in a little bit of numbers about your idea so we can get a better grasp on it.

#77

Hello NEM community, I wanted to throw in an idea for you all
The problem is multi-faceted and it seems the best way to not only ensure further and wider adoption, but to also step away from centralization at the same time would be to have a scaling system of diminishing returns.
You can even add a time component piggy-backed off the vested balance.

A very large problem with most crypto communities is that they really only cater to their early adopters, relying on a very unstable market to generate their growth.

So how do we incentivize new nodes, while not alienating the pillars of the community?

I propose rewards are base on to factors the newness of node and the holdings of the node
So to clarify, running a node would first be rewarded as a function of time vs the number of active new nodes - these would get  % of the fee reward (probably a larger %) This would decrease after say 6 months? At which point a node would become vested.
All the vested nodes would then get the other % of the reward pool which would be divided among them based on their holding and vested level, longer vesting = > % over time. 

This eliminates the pump and dumpers and many of the social aspects of who is running the nodes and for what purpose. It now places the nodes on people who truly support the technology on multiple levels and not just a $$ and also the people who are curious about the technology can become involved, gain XEM, and be even more incentivized to stay not only running their node, but also more inclined to utilize the currency as time is the only factor determining their accumulation - not holdings in the beginning.
This also creates an entirely new market for vested node's.

If the payout is a function of the number of nodes on a network than the system also becomes resistant to people just continually starting thousands of nodes as their ROI would drop with every node they open as those nodes wouldn't be generating tx fee's .


Taking into account how long a nodes has been active is actually a good idea. I'd take that aspect and change the currently proposed sytem in the following manner:

I'm assuming that active means "known to the network" ant not uptime as that will be reset quite regularly which is probably not desireable. Allthouh downtimes should lead to the vesting process  being paused or eventually cancled.

To me the biggest problem with the current proposal is the relatively high entrace fee. How about we try to soften that by taking into account how long a node has been known to the network ?

I.e.

You're completely new and wanna reap reawards ? - Pay 3 million XEM first
You're node is one of the good ole nodes ? - 500k will do

Prob not all that easy to find the right balance but imho better than requesting everyone to pay 3 million XEM.
#78

The general plan for NEM node rewards has been drafted and is now ready for public comment. If you have any queries, comments or suggestions you would like to make to improve this program, please post them below.  You can download the draft [url=https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_jImF0AZXu-TmpPSlVWT3c4Vms/view?usp=sharing]here


So NEM will be running smart contracts if there is to be a DAO?
#79


The general plan for NEM node rewards has been drafted and is now ready for public comment. If you have any queries, comments or suggestions you would like to make to improve this program, please post them below.  You can download the draft [url=https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_jImF0AZXu-TmpPSlVWT3c4Vms/view?usp=sharing]here


So NEM will be running smart contracts if there is to be a DAO?


Yes, smart contracts and voting.

Though DAOs can started pretty quickly as just (DO's) with voting and manual processing of actions and then upgrade to DAO as NIS is equipped to manage those more complicated tasks. 

Right now M of N is being tested on the testnet which is pretty important in enabling probler DAOs.
#80

I have re-thought this as I have been reading up on NEM today. From a philosophical standpoint we're facing a problem similar to what is having on the bitcoin dev team ATM.
How do you appease all the currently interested, currently vested and future interested and vested participants?
The only way to do this productively is to ensure their is a 'free market' approach. The tech simply needs to function as a proper architecture to scale efficiently when asked/needed and be secure from a technical standpoint. When the tech begins making decisions for the market we get all sorts of problems (like the large debate currently).

Some Thought Experiments:
The current proposal requires 3mil XEM+ and the reward program banks on the network fee's - if adoption fails to live up to the idea then there exists a possibility for stagnation in the network which is a big gamble. This also has a strong centralization effect on the network and seems to re-introduce a problem that PoI addressed, which is a entity controlling too many nodes, especially nodes that now have extra importance. Now you will never escape manipulation its inherent with any market, but can we eliminate or reduce the impact of said manipulation? Lowering the XEM amount, like the paper says, invites the opportunity for a node spam attack and incorporating any 'hard' limits always gets met with contention somewhere down the line. .

I believe the time a node has existed must come into play, but also a quality score as the purpose is to effectually make a strong backbone for the network. It seems the idea to constantly ping nodes to asses their quality is already there so why not display that quality score to the node operator? Its already there with PoI and the importance score to the network, the parameters that create that score and how that affects rewards would need some tweaking.

For New Nodes:
Importance score = (age of node)(PoI score)/(total # of new nodes) = x% of the allotted reward pool for each individual node.

So a new node, very enthusiastic about XEM and very active would be the ideal new node operator and this would reward them as such. The thought process being that enthusiasm and higher tx rate would carry over into more real world 'touches', exposing more people to the coin.

For Vested Nodes:
Importance score = (age of vested node)(PoI Score)(Quality score)/(total # of vested nodes) = y% of the remaining  reward pool given per node.

The reward pool distribution could follow something similar to what is proposed, this still leaves us with a problem when the reward pool runs out if tx fee's fail to be enough sustenance, however if you eliminate the large centralizing buy-in of 3m, which seems almost counter intuitive to PoI as it locks down funds, and instead we played with the numbers and figured out a way that after a new node had reached its vesting period its became a relatively small step financial step to become a vested node beyond a minimum quality score.  This should most likely be a function that relates to XEM at its current value and market cap (still thinking on this) - However if they can't obtain the quality or don't want to run a 24/7 node then a 3rd option should exist that removes them from and incentive pools and places their node in another pool that instead of the age of the node being the measure its the active time of the node so something like:

(active node time past 24h)(PoI Score)/(total # of random nodes)

This re-enforces the incentive to become a pillar in the community, but doesn't alienate the less fortunate and speculators and instead gives them a carrot to remain in the NEM community.

I haven't found a blockchain that has total XEM stats? I hope this at least a bit more clear and thought out!