-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I disagree. can you describe how exactly? What exactly can be gamed, if we use the protection described by me? It will provide the same security as directory authorities already have for voting about relays. It's true that ultimately anything can be gamed, but if it's not trivial to do or likely to happen this is an option we rather have than not have.
Quote: I'm not a big fan of automated systems that ban authorities as it may get false positives and it may be gamed and/or attacked.
An alternative solution is to make the voting a two-step system: first you publish the sha256 hash of your vote, then a few minutes later you publish the actual vote. If they didn't match, disregard the vote.
It may be a bit more work to implement, but should prove valuable in the long run as it mitigates most cases of authorities trying to manipulate the consensus.
Tom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV7q4KAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRlwYH/0PsTA+1eVefEJFJiHIAaQyz xMLvkg8wrIZ3e2/1xsRoOacltoUF7FEMQj/ZtFxUfJN+8uV+3Ss1zQdKfz/YKwZO xj7DS9d9xYUq3JiwMn9UThbMQ3nZfFLGy4RP5M7XRH8Ps2Y9oqKYqTM8NLAY570g qykNKLkC5DYjTOs7UqCu84IvyjmpEJE2Fntb7a8yvurzcVkLdqAIplbGLGrCb72Q MttCdv1juPpEjNL6E1r2MwR9gW9EYhf1hgoVoDtheC1sRcTj9xIDEk5ackNN3LHN aQTcfHUzOaZmbTgBv6cxYETy4fSk/kTFE/Z8K6ioheC0jj9gEdkTxWorGM37Yl4= =LWyx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----