GVT polls

GVT Polls Latest polls listed from top to bottom.

05/09/2023 6:54 AM Poll: Remove PoP from protocol. Introduction: Without PoP developer, we are "spreading" almost 50% of new coins using a unknown close source algorithm that is impossible to monitorize, replicate or verify. New mainnet and protocol can be siwtched instantly to : MNs 90% -project 10% (and be reverted if needed.) Proposal: Add PoP % inmediatelty to MNs to avoid exploits, until a better proposal can be developed open source. Options: 1) [29] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

04/27/2023 7:21 AM Poll: Reward Bermello for his continue development on project Noso from the beggining. Introduction: Bermello is the project Manager and leads all developement, including Node ( mainet ) ,Pool and Wallet software from the last 2 years. He is a key member for Noso project, spending a lot of developement hours every day as we can see on Github and all related software. Proposal: Reward Bermello with 25000 Noso from project funds (when are useable) to reward his leadership Options: 1) [30] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

04/27/2023 5:00 AM Poll: Reward JZteven for his continue development on project android apps. Introduction: User JZteven keeps an active android wallet that is currently a main part of the project utilitys; he is also helping developing support tools, and has proved to be a project believer holding the whole 2500 Noso he received from the first bounty +1 year ago. Proposal: Reward JZTeven with 5000 Noso from project funds (when are useable) to reward his contribution and inspire him to keep working on noso project. Options: 1) [30] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

04/07/2023 11:08 AM Poll: Listing of NOSO on txbit Intoduction: We are in the exciting phase of lifting NOSO onto the public stage through an official listing on the exchange Txbit which will result in the subsequent automatic listing on CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap. NOSO has reached out to txbit and after considering the listing efforts on their side, it was decided that listing fees will be 5000 $ (five thousand US Dollars, with no extra charge for liquidity). We therefore need to reach an agreement on multiple aspects of this listing process. @bermello (lead dev) agrees to pay for the txbit listing (5,000$) in exchange of 20,000 Noso (twenty thousand) from the project funds to be transferred to him when those funds are accessible (currently they can't be transferred). Estripa / Anisetin with the help of @Freshman will proceed with the listing process as soon as this poll gets majority. Time of listing is to be expected to occur after the next major mainnet update (earliest end of April 2023). This decision can be revoked before the payment is done if the governors detect a potential scam threat, returning the funds (5000 USDT) to @bermello. Exchange will take up to 14 days to list after the payment, and it includes up to 2 pairs. Trading pair choices are either NOSO / USDT or NOSO / BTC, preference to be defined on a later stage. Options: 1) [25] I vote IN FAVOR of the above proposal. I therefore accept to let the lead dev pay for the listing fees in exchange of 20k Noso. 2) [00] I vote AGAINST the proposal (no listing and therefore no Noso transferred to Bermello when coins available). 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [01] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

03/26/2023 12:19 AM Poll: Keep Freezed coins during 1 year and look after what to do with them Introduction: As we voted on a GVT poll, we freezed all addressess and coins being suspect of GPU Minning. At this point we have about 46 noso addressess frozen with 265071.53027071 noso coins. This was an emergency decision made months ago to control GPU issue, and now we need to make a decision about what we do with this freezed coins. Options: 1) [00] Yes, Freeze 1 year and then look after what to do with them 2) [00] No, just freeze forever 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [19] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

03/10/2023 8:38 AM Poll: Add Sliman Akkarin pool to protocol Introduction: As per our decision to regulate Noso mining pools, we have a request to add a fifth pool to our list. Proposal: Sliman Akkarin has agreed to operate and maintain a Noso pool for the project. This pool will be added to the allowed list making for a total of 5 pools. Options: 1) [12] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [19] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

03/08/2023 11:20 AM Poll: Unfreeze addresses with less than 100 noso balance Introduction: In order to simplify later actions, unfreeze this addresses since there are no real impact on overall coins available. This can be done inmediately. N26AMmc578jHhHMvTFfz9KyWXQWbZDH : 4.53939295 NEHv57LGmKoC4nJ9n5U9iXYPrbQmCf : 23.03460051 NsMGujfjUy3hvynjYUWo4KmWCS8WGA : 6.80165855 NRmt3FzTQHMBKs89H3AMAdLWJFBFAk : 85.98521008 N3HQcYAon9eSzr8SbYX4nsjPVbhmMFT : 96.08801975 N2EoyWN3wiATcKEMxgLFNE6va24koDa : 3.96985058 Options: 1) [22] Yes, unfreeze now. 2) [00] No, keep freezed. 3) [00] Not clear enough. 4) [00] Another option. 5) [00] Fake proposal.

03/01/2023 1:00 PM Poll: What to do with frozen coins. Introduction: As we voted on a GVT poll, we freezed all addressess and coins being suspectof GPU Minning. At this point we have about 46 noso addressess frozen with 265071.53027071 noso coins. This was an emergency decision made months ago to control GPU issue, and now we need to make a decision about what we do with this freezed coins. Options: 1) [00] Send all frezzed the coins ( 260 K aprox ) to the project's public address and use them for the project's development 2) [00] Unlock the coins, returning them to their "illegitimate" owners. 3) [00] Return to the main Noso Coin network to mine the coins again. 4) [00] Sent 20% fozen noso back to owners, and 80% to noso project developement. 5) [00] Make an annoucement, give 1 month to appeal and then send noso to Dev Address. 6) [25] Fake proposal/Not Clear/Another option.

02/14/2023 7:15 PM Poll: Block addresses after receive a MN payment. Introduction: Main idea is to avoid massive sells that could lead to mainnet unstability. If many MNs owners suddenly decide to sell after Noso is listed or liquidity pool is released, it will lead to a massive reduction on the active masternodes (the one which support mainnet) It should be usual that around 50% of circulating supply is used to get MNs payments. In order to avoid this, it is commonly used to block withdraws from addresses earning from masternodes for a determined period to avoid this. This is intended to bring stability to the mainnet and the coin price. Proposal: Block withdraws for any address receiving a Masternode payment for the next 2016 blocks (2 weeks). Options: 1) [27] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

12/23/2022 8:26 AM Poll: Add bermello pool to protocol Introduction: In order to speed up development, the possibility to run a pool is needed to speed up tests before releases; mainly, It is usefull to run a pool to complete the PoPW migration, and remove it once it is done. Proposal: Include a bermello pool into the valid pools list. Options: 1) [24] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

12/10/2022 1:32 AM Poll: Freeze forever GPU mined coins. Introduction: We all know very well the impact GPU miners had on the project. In order to minimize it, we can freeze those coins before any monetization is open. Idea is to keep the addresses containing the funds freezed at first stage, and then move those funds to a special "dead" address, so will be never used. No one, not even the project, will get a direct benefit from that. (only the indirect: less coins increase others coins relative value) To make it in a safer way, the addresses will be locked and then the proofs will be made public. Proofs are solid and will include only addresses beyond any rational doubt. Total amount is around 100-150K noso. Proposal: Freeze all GPU related addresses. This means that this address will not be able to send funds again. If any GVT is involved, it will be also freezed. Options: 1) [25] Yes for freeze 2) [0] No for not 3) [0] Not clear enough 4) [0] Another option 5) [0] Fake proposal

12/08/2022 1:03 PM Poll: Split current 20% on PoS between Project funds and MNs Introduction: Read here: https://discord.com/channels/1038030833782628413/1038039894615928903/1050486839410180166 Proposal: From current PoS 20%, 10% to project address NpryectdevepmentfundsGE and the other 10% added to MNs reward. Options: 1) [25] Yes 2) [0] No 3) [0] Not clear enough 4) [0] Another option 5) [0] Fake proposal

11/15/2022 11:52 PM Poll:Freeze Gpu miners Adresses. Introduction: Gpu miners had been swarming around Noso for quite a while and they collected between 50k - 300k+ Noso; finally shared the source code only after the threat of consequences for those coins, which was not even a good code and only after they make a huge profit. Options: 1) [17] Yes for freeze 2) [15] No for not 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [05 Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal --- This poll is canceled ---

11/15/2022 11:52 PM Poll:Reduce the shares limit per pool each block. Introduction: Calculation of 57 shares per block was based in 1 pool and a 100 Kh/s miner. Now we have 5 pools and we should try to adjust that number to level even more the rewards for small miners, discouraging farmers. Proposal: Reduce the shares per block to 10 on each pool to keep a minimal POW proof without benefit farmers. Idea is to attract the higher number of new members to the comunity. Options: 1) [10] Yes 2) [21] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [01] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/14/2022 8:18 AM Poll: Mine undisputed blocks to project address. Introduction: Current PoPW system could be hijacked if someone realize a DDoS attack to all available pools (paying for a DDoS protection service can be a big waste for pool owners, making it unprofitable). This will leave the mainnet without a valid besthash to build a new block, stopping the block generation under current protocol conditions. Since solo is now not allowed, block generation requires pools and are only few. Proposal: Implement on protocol that blocks without a valid besthash are credited to project funds address NpryectdevepmentfundsGE to guarantee the blockchain continuity. This will prevent any exploit because only benefits the project itself, and protect the blockchain against any possible scenario of lack of pools. Options: 1) [22] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/13/2022 2:15 PM Poll: Add Rukzuk pool to our list of allowed pools Introduction: As per our decision to regulate Noso mining pools, we have a request to add a fifth pool to our list. Proposal: Rukzuk has requested for her Noso pool to be added to this allowed list making for a total of 5. Options: 1) [23] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/11/2022 9:50 AM Poll: Add Ravifj pool to our list allowed pools Introduction: As per our decision to regulate Noso mining pools, we have a request to add a fourth pool to our list. Proposal: Ravifj has requested for his Noso pool to be added to this allowed list making for a total of 4. Options: 1) [23] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/10/2022 5:47 AM Poll: Create a protocol address to store a governors controlled project funds. Introduction: In order to handle future requirements, project should start to create a project funds reserve. Control of those funds could lead to problems, so the better way to control it is to implement a special address (called Noso_Project_Funds_xx, where xx will be the checksum); its funds will be only accessed via GVTs votations (directives). This can be done adding a "Special address" on sumary via a especial protocol instruction. This address do not have keys (public or private), since it will be a special identity inside the protocol, only used to store project funds. Apart from the difference to access the funds, all other things will be identical to a regular address; public, can verifiy its history, get MNs payments, be used to mine, etc. Proposal: Create the special address to store project funds. Options: 1) [26] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/10/2022 5:12 AM Poll: Regulate allowed minning pools ownership. Introduction: The implemented system for the distribution of new coins, POPW, depends on the allowed pools being reliable. It is easy to determine if a pool is trying to exploit the system and take action against it to suspend it. It is therefore advisable to apply minimum criteria to accept new pools. Proposal: New pools owners need to be a GVT owner and be approved by a GVT votation. Options: 1) [24] Yes 2) [00] No 3) [00] Not clear enough 4) [00] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/08/2022 12:40 AM Poll: Replace PoW reward with Protocol owned faucet. Introduction: Please check previous proposal. Proposal: Gradually reduce PoW rewards (keeping the current minimum of 5%) over the next weeks and start distribution of coins through a protocol governed faucet. Options: 1) [02] Yes 2) [09] No 3) [11] Not clear enough 4) [05] Another option 5) [00] Fake proposal

11/06/2022 7:02 AM Poll: Reduce PoW reward % to limit GPU miners impact over coins distribution? Introduction: Some weeks ago, due to a sudden increment in the mainnet hashrate, and after some forensic study to the blocks solutions, it was clear that someone were using a non-public software to win an advantage over other miners. It is imposible to know exactly what is the GPU hashrate in the mainnet now, but is surely way more than 50%. This is causing an unethical and serious damage to the project, unfairly distributing coins and discouraging small miners to join or remain in the project; we are not actually attractive to miners anyway. Proposition: Reduce the PoW % from current 52% to 5%, at least until a better solution is found. This can be done in less than 24 hours in a safe way and should reduce the impact since MNs are already very well distributed. Keep a 5% is necessary to secure some miners active, needed for block generation currently. Options: 1) [13] Yes, do the reduction ASAP. 2) [07] No, keep it as it is now and search another solution. 3) [00] Not clear proposal. 4) [15] Another option (please, include details) 5) [00] Fake proposal.

11/05/2022 3:16 AM Poll: Merge MNs and PoS? Introduction: On the project early stages, PoS payment was implemented to reward first holders to keep their coins (hold) This was implemented as a temp feature until MNs payment was implemeted. Of course, MNs is already implemented, so there is no real need to keep those payments separate and continue rewarding "dead" wallets. Proposition: Merge PoS reward to MNs payment, so the 20% currently distributed between all addresses with enough coins are added to the MNs payment; this means that 100% passive income will dissapear. Options: 1) [38] Yes, do the merge ASAP. 2) [00] No, keep it as it is now. 3) [00] Not clear proposal. 4) [00] Another option (please, include details) 5) [00] Fake proposal.