In the next month or two we should define exactly how we want to modify the mining algorithm and, if needed, the reward scheme.
It's really tempting to move towards a multi-algo coin. Since we only have finite resources it's also tempting to just pick a well-established second algorithm, where X11 must be a strong contender. One worry is the existence of some X11 ASICs. It would be good to get a discussion on this.
Next, we should think about whether such X11-generated blocks should have exactly the same reward type as is currently used. An argument could be made that we should do one or more of the following:
- Auto-distribute some of the block rewards to existing coin holders.
- Auto-donate some of the coins to a specified cause.
At one extreme, the miner gets very little and there will be few miners. At the other extreme we're just doing the same as before, with one more algorithm. In-between, we may be encouraging people to hold onto their coins and we may also be supporting something useful.
Let me give some background. If I were starting the SMLY today I think I would change at least the following:
- Choose a different mining algorithm (or a combination of several).
- Try to give an incentive to hold onto one's coins. I'm not convinced that the proof-of-stake approach is the way to go. My preference would be to figure out a way to take a large portion (30%?) of the mining reward and simply split this among existing owners.
- There would not be a premine.
- One would automatically funnel a large portion (30%?) of the mining rewards to a handful of addresses belonging to specified charities (the tutor-web system and the Education-in-a-suitcase, EIAS, non-profit).
In the current case there is no need to donate to the tutor-web system which owns the premine (and we can't really take that back). It would be extremely useful for EIAS to receive donations.
Similarly, suppose we figured out a way to maintain a list of all addresses containing at least x SMLY and we split 30% of the mining rewards evenly among those addresses. If this is a part of the criterion for accepting a new (X11) block, then my gut feeling says we won't have any ASICs messing up the scene. It also means we have a strong incentive to keep a whole lot of SMLY (we can discuss the numbers).
Another way to say this is that the new (X11) miners get a lower reward than the scrypt miners. Of course that will result in fewer miners bothering to mine, but it will also result in a lower difficulty.
I don't know whether this is all feasible or acceptable, but I'd like a discussion, please!