近期节点贿选成为国外社区讨论的一个焦点问题。 Thomax Cox 最近在访谈中提到了一个可能的解决方案。 https://youtu.be/bo9bZQJDWeg Doghouse做了的文字整理。 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KegdWFIoBV3vxdB8YrHdBTTURkQGCylgAY3t5BKUSc8/edit?usp=sharing 现将Doghouse整理的文字稿，翻译出来，供大家参考。 以下是正文： 1. All bp rewards go into a one week escrow.
所有BP的节点收入都纳入7天托管；
2. During that week, ANY 2 paid BPs can pay one non-refundable token each to file a grievance for any reason, and freeze the payment of 100 tokens of the accused BP. (so, if EOS Bad earned 3400 tokens during the relevant period, EOSAccuser1 and EOSAccuser2 would put up 34 tokens each to be burned upon filing the grievance.)
在这一周中，任何两个有收入的BP，按1：100缴纳一定的EOS后，可以任何理由起诉一个作恶的节点。（比如，要罚没作恶节点的EOS为3400个那么两个起诉的节点需要分别支付34个EOS）。
3. An accusation may be filed for ANY antisocial behavior and is not necessarily limited to oficial violations. This is important to note. BPs are free to publicly enforce social norms.
指控的内容可以是任何不当的行为，不局限于行政违法行为。这个非常重要。BPs 可以自行定义需要遵守的行为标准。
4.Upon the filing of a grievance, 7 random paid BPs (who are not involved) are automatically selected to act as a jury to decide (5/7 multisig) whether to burn or return the escrowed funds. This deliberation can take no more than 7 days. 在起诉节点以后，将从有收入的主备节点中，随机抽取7个节点组成陪审团，对案件进行裁决，要不罚没(燃烧)或者返回资金。整个过程不超过7天。 
延伸讨论： 1.How can this be gamed?
是否可行？
If we assume a pool of 80 Paid BPs, one accused, and the minimum of 2 accusers, there are 77 potential jurors (that means 77!/(7!(77-7)!) = 2.4 billion possible juries.) To guarantee exoneration, a bad actor would need 75 paid sock-puppets. How many sock-puppets would a bad actor need to guarantee exoneration just 20% of the time? If that many sock-puppets can be created, it’s probably time to hard-fork. And the BPs are aware enough of their community that if there were suddenly an influx of unknowns appearing in the paid-BP ranks, the well behaved BPs would have enough warning to “call shenanigans” -- and accuse the sock-puppets as well!
我们假定有80个有收入的节点，1个被控告，2个控告人，有77个潜在的陪审员（即由 77!/(7!(77-7)!) = 24亿种组合）。为保证逃脱惩罚，作恶的节点需要贿赂75个节点。如果有太多的受控节点，可能就需要硬分叉了。BP们也会注意，是不是有突然的不知名节点出现，正直的节点总是会保持足够的警惕。
2.Should juries be anonymous during deliberations? After?
陪审团是否需要匿名？
There was a suggestion that BPs are political businesses and depend on the largesse of larger BPs and whales, and so if the juries were not anonymous there would be retribution, in the form of votes being pulled. The counter argument is that such retribution can only be done once per juror and the public outcry may be violent enough to recover. Large non-beholden BPs would be free to starve bad actors on that basis -- Piranhas stripping the whale with a thousand tiny bites.
有建议认为陪审团应该是匿名的，因为可能受到大鲸撤票的报复。也用反的意见认为，应该实名，因为陪审团一但逐一遭到报复，会受到强烈的公开声援，很多没有关联关系的节点都会加入惩治的行列。
—-
编译者/作者：何德林
玩币族申明：玩币族作为开放的资讯翻译/分享平台，所提供的所有资讯仅代表作者个人观点，与玩币族平台立场无关，且不构成任何投资理财建议。文章版权归原作者所有。
|
