Vote.Bitcoin.com is coming soon!

[rogerver]

With the help from the original creator of Bitcoinocracy, we have forked it onto vote.bitcoin.com

Anyone who wants to help contribute can find the code here:
https://github.com/bitcoin-portal/bitcoinocracy

I think the community will really like this once more people can easily find it on Bitcoin.com

Next we will be skinning it to match the rest of Bitcoin.com, and adding a link to a forum thread for each topic to be discussed.

[bitkilo]

Now this looks really cool, a very simple foolproof way for votes to be counted, nice work.

[twitchyseal]

Will it be ready in time for the election?

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Bitcoinocracy was the voting website Core members urged us to vote at, correct? From what I recall, the vote was in favor of larger blocks.

If so, glad to see it being forked to bitcoin.com!!!!!!!!!

I see the future and it is bright

Thank you for all you do, and everyone, for that matter.

[coin@coin]

Interesting idea, great to see it integrated on this site!

[grnqrtr]

Bye Bye

[RonCar]

Wow, this is a really good idea! I especially like the idea of linking each topic to a thread here where it can be discussed/debated. I really hope this will help us get somewhere with on chain scaling.

Edit: Can anyone explain how this works. I am specifically wondering if bitcoin has to remain in the address used to sign a message in order for it to count the bitcoin towards the vote? It seems like it should or you could just keep moving bitcoin from address to address and signing the message over and over again.

I think you just have to copy paste the title of the voting topic as your signed message, then you submit your signature. I have seen that there are addresses with 0 btc so i guess you do not have to worry about your bitcoins as what they only need is your signed message. However the validity shows that it is related to the amount of bitcoins inside the address, the more btc you have the more weight you could give so I think those 0 btc address doesnt help at all gaining weight

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Wow, this is a really good idea! I especially like the idea of linking each topic to a thread here where it can be discussed/debated. I really hope this will help us get somewhere with on chain scaling.

Edit: Can anyone explain how this works. I am specifically wondering if bitcoin has to remain in the address used to sign a message in order for it to count the bitcoin towards the vote? It seems like it should or you could just keep moving bitcoin from address to address and signing the message over and over again.

I think you just have to copy paste the title of the voting topic as your signed message, then you submit your signature. I have seen that there are addresses with 0 btc so i guess you do not have to worry about your bitcoins as what they only need is your signed message. However the validity shows that it is related to the amount of bitcoins inside the address, the more btc you have the more weight you could give so I think those 0 btc address doesnt help at all gaining weight

Still vote anyways right, a vote is a vote!!!!!!!!!

[grnqrtr]

Bye Bye

[RonCar]

Wow, this is a really good idea! I especially like the idea of linking each topic to a thread here where it can be discussed/debated. I really hope this will help us get somewhere with on chain scaling.

Edit: Can anyone explain how this works. I am specifically wondering if bitcoin has to remain in the address used to sign a message in order for it to count the bitcoin towards the vote? It seems like it should or you could just keep moving bitcoin from address to address and signing the message over and over again.

I think you just have to copy paste the title of the voting topic as your signed message, then you submit your signature. I have seen that there are addresses with 0 btc so i guess you do not have to worry about your bitcoins as what they only need is your signed message. However the validity shows that it is related to the amount of bitcoins inside the address, the more btc you have the more weight you could give so I think those 0 btc address doesnt help at all gaining weight

Still vote anyways right, a vote is a vote!!!!!!!!!

That's true but it doesn't help at all. Even a million vote with 0 BTC wouldn't increase the weight. Anyway I think your in favor of larger blocks so no worries as two of them having 44k BTC (Wow ) is also in favor

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I think you just have to copy paste the title of the voting topic as your signed message, then you submit your signature. I have seen that there are addresses with 0 btc so i guess you do not have to worry about your bitcoins as what they only need is your signed message. However the validity shows that it is related to the amount of bitcoins inside the address, the more btc you have the more weight you could give so I think those 0 btc address doesnt help at all gaining weight

Still vote anyways right, a vote is a vote!!!!!!!!!

That's true but it doesn't help at all. Even a million vote with 0 BTC wouldn't increase the weight. Anyway I think your in favor of larger blocks so no worries as two of them having 44k BTC (Wow ) is also in favor

That's where most people have it wrong, I'm nor a big blocker or small blocker, I'm in favor of Bitcoin. Bitcoin as a peer to peer digital cash payment system, which is outlined in: https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf

[rendravolt]

Yes I am one of those people who wait for this, good luck.

[rogerver]

This is ready for you guys to start using now: vote.bitcoin.com

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

This is ready for you guys to start using now: vote.bitcoin.com

$55.4M USD for a blocksize increase, versus $12.3M USD

That puts it in some perspective, a super majority!!!!!!!!!!!!

I still remember when a small group of people from Core said, "go vote, go vote" then people vote, & those people end up pissy because they are wrong. Where is the blocksize increase???