Topic: [ANN] ORA :: NXT 'monetary system' currency - page 6. (Read 181214 times)

Yes, I like to consider all options So we would keep these coins in the treasury account, or would they possibly come from a community 'minting' effort of some kind? Some form of 'bonus' or dividend always adds a good psychological & financial boost to holding a coin.

I've been thinking a lot about the option to have PoW minting today, it's a very interesting option to increase coin supply, and the possibility to have the 'work' be something useful really appeals to me. As a non-dev I'm not sure of the options for 'work' we can deploy in an app designed to run on a smart-phone, but it is an intriguing option.

Something definitely worth to look at. Will do so. But the structure may "force" us to do so thetefore please advice what are the projects that you think is worth adopting so we can proceed with talks.

Edit: i think we should focus more what techs we need to adopt that gives real value. Projects like someone has an idea to integrate fiat to crypto, LETS, gamecoins etc. Something people will have usefulness. Randomly adding projects and adding valuable projects has its benefits. I would go for the latter, adding more value to the coin. What do you think? It's like direction.

Notice there is a "Minting" section under MS, coins could be added as required.  The effect on the economy is identical, the only difference is that whilst price stays the same, market capitalization instantly jumps (as you see with ripple) when a new chunk is minted.

Of course you could all proactively start looking at projects to fold in immediately, the more you have joining forces the quicker supply will deplete, and the more momentum you will gain.

Great news, very excited for you guys, so much potential.

I like the proposed changes and having more people involved in ORA by burning other coins, but I don't like having too much of the pie in a treasury account for a very long time. (And even a year is much in crypto right now)
It's not that I don't trust you... people in contact with ora the first time wouldn't. It's a too centralised idea.
Maybe smart contracts can solve this issue in future, but I think for now it's better to reduce the time having a high amount in a treasury account.

Kora,

Would you consider an addition to the modification,

Distribute x% of coins to stakeholders per annum if there is no project added to that particular year? Say 1% to 2%?

Thanks Darkhorse! The changes we are proposing WILL reduce each original ORA stakeholders share of the final MS currency we launch. IMO the change (letting people 'burn' coins currently on crypto 'life-support' in exchange for coins in ORA2) should increase the ORA community and user-base significantly, and thus the potential & viability of ORA. While the original ORA1 stakeholders will obviously end up with a smaller % of the ORA2 'pie', bringing in extra people and talent from other coins on the brink of failure will INCREASE the size of the ORA2 'pie' significantly, so I'm confident the original ORA stakeholders will end up being a LOT better off.

Which would you rather - X% of AltaVista, or 0.X% of Google -  Y% of MySpace, or 0.Y% of Facebook?

I like the change in direction suggested by coinsolidation (Mark), and I think it can make ORA a lot stronger, and help us reach 'critical mass' in terms of adoption a lot quicker than expected, but maybe some ORA stakeholders don't ...  if you don't like this plan, or you have some suggestions for modifications to the basic idea we're proposing, SPEAK NOW! We're listening

Dear Mark, thank you for the suggestion on the re-structure,

we may use solution 5, the "radical change" as a base with modification. Modifications will be as below:

1.) ora development should come out from overall portion - 1,000,000,000 - (allocated development fund) = MS Pot. This is to develop the overall ORA not just a certain community. Makes sense? Suggested amount around 25,000,000 overall. So the balance MS pot = 975,000,000.

2.) 1st percentage will be allocated to the ORA stake holders. Percentage will be confirmed after discussion with the team members.

Dear all, the above will be a total restructure to the previous known distribution. I suggest to those that believe in the ORA and its team (the whole Ora community) to add to your stakes with at least 200,000 ora coins minimum in your account. The above structure will reduce the percentage of your holding drastically and we feel it is needed to give value to the coins of your holding. Holding hundreds of coin with less value vs holding small portion of high value coins is your decision making process here.

With this move, we are expecting to bring in more techs and community into the ORA structure with more case uses for its users. More updates will be coming soon.  

P.S We are expecting to test the MS system next week in the testnet.

For those not familiar with the details of how the NXT monetary system works, here are a couple of great sources of information

http://nxter.org/nxt-for-financial-experts-local-groups-and-cryptofans/

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issue/136/monetary-system

The more people who know how the MS works the better are our chances of designing a great system (there are plenty of options we can use, and once created the ORA MS currency can't be changed). Also, if we're going to pursue coinsolidations's suggestion of letting other coins burn into ORA, then we need to understand all the implications of that, and it's critical we do this in the most efficient and optimal way. I think we should start creating some MS ORA simulations on the testnet so we can start experimenting.

The NXT MS is incredibly powerful! Did you know that MS currencies can 'mint' new coins using PoW, just like a regular PoW crypto like bitcoin!

That got me thinking about PoW coins that do 'useful' computations, like Gridcoin does with Boinc. Could ORA use 'meaningful' PoW to mint new coins? Would that let us add new 'migrant' coins into the future via burning (i.e. the option to add new 'migrant' coins is open ended for a while), expanding the ORA supply via PoW minted ORA in some way? If we increased the ORA coin supply at the same time we increased the number of ORA users (and so ORA demand) would that still cause 'inflation' that reduced the purchasing power of ORA (i,e, the price dropped)? In the long-term probably yes, but what about just over the bootstrapping period we're trying to attract 'refugees' from dead & dying coins? I don't know the answer, but I'm willing to explore possibilities. Maybe we set a deadline for adding migrant coins. I do strongly believe that the bedrock of crypto currency success is people, and the more people using ORA, the better our chances of adoption and long-term success!

Could the ORA app perform PoW minting to do 'useful' computational work, something that creates real economic value?

Possibilities are very exciting to ponder, and I encourage everyone to get their thinking hats on, and share their thoughts!!

https://nxtblocks.info/#section/assets_exchange/market/16194910134118257692

Is it too late to get in on Ora distribution? How to get a stake?

Thanks for the update . Dev!

Thanks for the input Mark!! I think this new trajectory is really exciting, and should be very effective at helping ORA grow into something pretty cool

No problem, you guys are doing plenty which I'm very grateful for!! But 'Boss' ... I think the 'Starfish' prefers 'comrade' or 'brother' 

Also, I like the look of those numbers Mark suggested for burning in the coins that choose to migrate over to ORA. Can we add a few % for CryptoFest though? I plan to ramp up some promo effort on CryptoFest to coincide with MS and all these exciting plans.

+1. Unemployed atmo and funds are tight

Noted. Boss has spoken. Actually i feel bad that you are paying for everything. Wish i could help you.

I will pay the 25,000 NXT for the 'ORA' name on the MS. I can afford it, and I think it's better that we don't sell any ORA for this purpose now that we're likely to change the original distribution. As for the Nxt used to lock into the MS, why not a peppercorn of 1 Nxt? If ORA gains community 'trust' and is fully decentralised as a Starfish, do we need to have any Nxt backing? Maybe not.

9%+25% = 34,000,000 MS, or 3.4% of total (1B) supply to get the oversight project off the ground and run it.  If Bitcoin had 3.4% of total supply in the foundation, they'd have 714,000 BTC to fund projects with.  Seems more than reasonable?

I realise this is a radical proposal, but it's only a proposal, an alternative approach to discuss

This is a radical change to the whole structure. Though i like it, but sounds a little unfair towards the initial Ora stakeholders especially even the bounty to develop the infrastructure of the whole Ora is coming from the Ora staleholder's portion. Perhaps a little modification there? But the merging structure looks nice as project adopting Ora will be considered segments.

Only giving 0.9-0.09% of total supply to a project merging in which has potentially had years of work, vs 50%+ to stake holder of one still establishing project, doesn't feel too fair.

Suggestion 5:  Give 10% of remaining MS supply to each project.

Project 1: ORA
Allocated 100,000,000 MS (apportioned 50% / 9% / 25% / remainder as described)
MS Pot: 900,000,000 MS

Project 2: ??
Allocated 90,000,000 MS
MS Pot: 810,000,000 MS

Project 3: ??
Allocated 81,000,000 MS
MS Pot: 729,000,000 MS

Rule 2: 10% as a cap, one project may be a single coin, another may be half of three communities joining, another may be four people working on an app for one dead coin. Apportioning the assigned ms should be easy as already discussed.  Choosing what percentage up to 10 to apply to a project could be hard, perhaps just a social voting process?

Lot's to think about, I must bow out of the conversation for now, as much to do.

Small note, If you could issue 100m instead of 1b instead as a total supply, it may help in the long term, a single unit of currency should perceived as having value by itself, if you have 100m of them that's possible, if you have a billion you may always be stuck with it being fractions of a cent / a few satoshi.  Consider the gift of 1 DOGE vs 1 NXT vs 1 LTC.  Parity with other currencies is an important measure for community members, to go 1:1 with cent, nxt, 10 cents, dollar can give a substantial feeling of worth/merit.

time is on our side.  

edit: i would like to bring attention to everyone. There is a high possibility we need to raise funds for 2 matters.

1.) To register the name on MS, a certain fee is charged. 25,000 nxt for 3 letter name and 1,000 nxt for 4 letter name. My personal opinion to register the 3 letter name for ORA. How we can do this, well there are 2 options, 1st by fundraising by donations if possible by all stakeholders, 2nd to sell a certain portion to raise the fund. Please share your thoughts on this.

2.) Amount of Nxt needed to lock into MS system to issue the coins on the platform. It will sorta give the coins a value. Need your opinion on this as well.