The participants of the meetup made final edits and made a final decision on the timing and sequence of launching an auction contest, a Storage and Subscription design contest (a competition for creating a subscription mechanism) for voting. They discussed new software solutions and ideas of DevEx Sub Governance participants.
Alexey Novikov proposed a work plan for the near future: first, to solve the issue of changing the composition of organizers in judging in order to make voting easier, and then to launch contests in turn — one per week. This is convenient for both contestants (the same people can participate in different contests) and for judging.
Sergey Tyurin supported Alexey’s idea about the order of contest launching, arguing that the number of judges is limited and even if contests end at different times, it will be difficult to judge them all in a short time.
Pavel Prigolovko agreed neither with Alexei nor Sergei Tyurin, stating that contests are different, that “it’s one thing to write a smart contract, and another thing is to write a specification”. Pavel made a proposal to run contests in parallel, having previously taken control of the completion of the contest dates and excluding the possibility of their simultaneous completion.
Contests and their launch
Ivan Kotelnikov made edits for the Storage design contest. He suggested lowering the cut-off threshold by evaluation and removing the obligation to use ZKP. The thought was mentioned that ZKP is a super promising technology, it’s the wave of the future, it just needs to be learned.
Ivan also said that according to the current wording the contest is a little more complicated and now in fact includes the requirement to describe economic incentives and a more detailed description of the data storage method. It was decided to put the contest to the vote, taking into account Ivan’s edits.
On-line auctions implementation
Two applications were submitted for the On-line auctions implementation contest, the judges did not vote and it was decided to restart the contest. The problem with the contest is that there is no person to present it. However, the question of whether to make a separate contest for each type of auction is still open.
Mitja Goroshevsky said that Pruvendo (a company engaged in the formal verification of smart contracts) got interested and is writing a contest for an auction. There is a person in this organization who writes auctions specifically. A proposal was made to invite this person to the next meeting and discuss with him the terms, cost and other features of the contest.
Mitja Goroshevsky expressed the idea that the quality of works at the last auction contest was not high enough and he believes that Pruvendo will present a good solution.
Alexei Novikov disagreed with Mitya’s proposal, arguing that the contest had already been written. In addition, a vote was held four weeks ago, it was decided to simply restart the auction contest.
Alexey Novikov said that this contest was presented by Renat three weeks ago. The participants of the meetup asked Renat all the questions about the contest and it was decided to put it to the vote.
During the meetup, the question of choosing the person responsible for launching the voting contests was resolved. Alexey Novikov complained that after Sasha Bazarov went on vacation, all of Sasha’s duties were redirected to him. Alexey stated that only today he came to the understanding that he should also launch contests.
Pavel suggested dividing the duties between the author of the contest and the person who “launches” this contest. At the moment, this person is Alexey. So, the author’s duty is to prepare the final PDF document of the contest and send it to Alexey, and Alexey’s duty is to launch the contest for voting and inform everyone that the voting has begun. This distribution of responsibilities should help make the work of launching contests clearer and more organized. After that, Pavel announced that he would make the final PDF document for all three contests, and Alexey would put them to the vote, having foreseen that their completion time was different. Pavel’s proposal was unanimously approved by all participants of the meetup.
About the contract system
Ivan Kotelnikov spoke about the system of contracts he recently wrote.
There is another smart contract. I came up with the idea that it would get deployed (set up), then it would deploy itself elsewhere, send all the money to where it deployed its clone and then self-destruct. Thus, it will be a “grasshopper” on the blockchain.
Pavel immediately found a practical application for this idea. Some time ago, we received a proposal to write a series of simple smart contract contests for people who have never written smart contracts. This way, newcomers can practice writing smart contracts. Ivan willingly agreed to arrange several such contests.
At the end of the conversation, the participants moved on to the topic of product management. Sergey Tyurin asked a question about the Storage design contest: “How many exabytes is it possible to store painlessly and how much will it cost?”
Pavel replied that one can compare TON Storage with Facebook (produces 4 exabytes of data per year) or with Twitter (10,000 tweets per second, one tweet — 120 bytes), because the main application of Storage is distributed types of social networks. In any case, according to the contest requirement, the author must make his business case for each proposal.
At the end of the conversation, Sergey Tyurin reminded everyone, it has been repeatedly discussed, that there should be a separate virtual currency for Storage with its own commissions, features, and advantages.