Increasing mir deposit for poll

If fraud polls kept on coming i think we need to bump the amount of mirs to create a poll ( double is fair)

scammers as we see ,would take their chance to lose 100 mirs. Increasing the amount of mirs to create a poll, will create a better content and will push scammers away.

Opinion on this ?

1 Like

Write the code and we can vote. You would need to write the code but your missing the point.

The amount is not the issue. Even a failed vote the amount is returned to the person making the proposal. If you really want to punish both of these suspected scams (177 and 178) then don’t vote for them. When they don’t reach threshold they will lose the collateral. Not voting for either is is more powerful then voting no. Voting at all helps both right now.

1 Like

If a poll failed the mirs will be distributed to voters.

1 Like

I would have to hear this from a credible source because numerous people even a mod in discord has said the opposite before and stated only when a poll does not meet threshold. That does not makes sense to me. To punish people for not being able to read minds or having a minority view is illogical.

I see what you mean and i think you have a point.i have no idea about coding and i’m new crypto.

Then what will stop those who have the intention to hurt the protocol from keep on doing it ?

This does not appear to be a good idea because the fraud poll address has $100,000 sitting in Anchor. Increasing MIR required for poll would imply smalltime players are the bad actors and should be prevented from creating polls when this was not the case at all.

1 Like

No one has lost Mir in a very long time. Since we started the horrible path of paying for votes every vote meets quorum. Therefore as long as it meets quorum no one losses the collateral. Since we buy votes with incentives then they all seem to meet quorum now out of greed when in a situation like this people just would not have voted but greed drives them to vote for every possible poll.

Name any voting process where paying people to vote on matters they have no interest in or are uneducated in works out positively?

I think you replied to my other comment twice in different spots. Your reply above is irrelevant to my comment on this thread.

2 Likes

This Dakota is trying every turn to defend the same creator of the fraud poll (#177, and #169, 173). I wonder if somehow they are related or even the same person???

1 Like

The least we can do is bump mir deposit for polls and add a report bottom. If certain thershold of reports is reached, the creater will not get the mirs back and it will be distributed to voters/reporters.

I think we are going to see fraud spams at some point since they have nothing to lose

Your response is anticipated and typical of intellectual deficiency. I speak on facts and your responses show you speak on emotion and that is the substantive difference from logic. If I controlled that much in funds I sure would not be wasting my time in here talking to you.

Like I said above we should stop paying people to vote. You can be refunded for the cost but blatantly paying people to vote (“incentivizing”) causes everyone to vote and that is not what you want. You want people who are educated on what they are actually voting for. You can simply look at the record and see after the additional two “scam” reporting proposals were posted people were still voting yes on “burn” proposal. If that does not open peoples eyes I do not know what would.

How intellectual deficient one could be to jump out strongly in favor of proposals literally discriminating key mAsssets (mDOT, mBTC) that could be minted 24x7?