Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 24. (Read 9723768 times)

Maybe paying people like you to write tosh like this is the way forward. You could make it up as you went along which is what you're good at and if you were verbose enough we might even manage one of those blip sized pimples on this chart  

(Or as an extension of the idea. Why not use Dash's fabled GETC as a basis to pay both you and the masternodes !)

I think so, paying people to hold it is better for the ecosystem than paying the miners to sell it.  All the staking/DeFi coins work like this, DASH is facing headwinds because a lot of early people such as yourself and others cashed out at massive profits after we accidently emitted far too many coins at a zero price.  We've struggled with this fact all the while other issues, eg slow development and various grifts in the DAO soured the mood of a lot of people, but we have begun to stabilise and we should see stronger gains in the coming years, especially with all this adoption we are seeing, DASH is really being used for payments and people just love it!

The ones who hold dash should be paid more and the ones who work to earn it less ?

This is why I sold my dash. As an outside investor I see no attraction to get back in

Good luck. You need it

In case you missed it here is the interview with Ash, very interesting to hear about CTX and Dash Direct.  What are great community supporting Dash !
https://youtu.be/g-yNH7nqDBI

more than 300 pairs of exchange of Dash with fiat, stablecoins, and other cryptographies.

Average daily volume of more than 300 million dollars.

A daily average that exceeds 10,000 transactions.

You may be right, but not only capitalization will mark whether a coin is used or not.

What if I accept and share, is that if the capitalization does not gain traction, the financing will get worse and worse, and therefore the media will be reduced entering a death spiral.

Imagine Dash at $ 10. It may not disappear, but I doubt that Ryan can afford his monthly luxuries at those prices, he will abandon ship and look for another project that allows him to improve his situation.

In the meantime, the master nodes will have been ruined, and the mine will have been abandoned for being unprofitable.

Will this happen?

Well, I think it is at least worth waiting a few months into 2022 to see if the new Dash platform supplies are another empty promise as it has been for years, or there really is something else.

Good luck to all and greetings.

Even the bots have abandoned this worthless shit. 75th place and I warned about it! Soon they will be kicked out of the top 100 and will be removed from exchanges!

Likeways and I appreciate the gracious reply.

I like that entry on currency velocity. Obviously in a mass payment method that is the key between a garbage used by four friends in their MONOPOLY games, or a true revolution that encourages everyone to install a wallet on their cell phones and use it everywhere.


I think Dash has taken the right step in that direction and has put on the table the necessary tools to achieve it, the problem that I see, more than that of almost free coins for the master nodes, is the inability to demonstrate to users why yes they should use Dash and not any other currency.


There are more than 10,000 coins on the poster, what tells me that one placed in position 80 is going to be the revolution?

 Why is Dash not a red color In the meantime gray for everyone?

Obviously I cannot use what I do not know.

Failures like Max Keizer, or Ryan spending thousands of dollars on an absurd makeover, super sonic planes, the gift of coins to Venezuela that were exchanged for dollars instantly, or the ATM fiasco, were hard to assimilate.

Think for a moment with Dash above $ 1000 the money that was thrown away in budgets.

I remember that years ago I myself said that an announcement could have been made in the super bowl with a famous person using his Dash coin, but no, they preferred to throw all that in the trash.

I understand some things from your perspective, and I believe that you seek the same thing as me and many people. Anyway I also think that there are a large number of nodes that will vote yes, to everything that DCG says, even if the DCG decides to double its budget tomorrow, it will come out yes. And that for me is a problem.

Greetings and thanks for your time.

It's not a "theory" it's an account of capital flows.

It doesn't say anything about whether we go down or up, only about how competitive Dash can be at storing capital in the chain compared to those other coins you mention. That account predicts that we'll be less competitive than our fully mined counterparts in attracting capital and therefore lose ranking relative to them. (Unless there's some other demand driver such as monetary velocity. But there isn't - that's at rock bottom as well and my "theory" for that is that it's a result of our poor performance in store of value. So it all goes back to the original issue).

Our performance in this respect is nothing to do with "fashion". It's systemic.

Your theories of mining and coin sharing go down when we look at Monero or LTC, BTC, BTCSV falling anyway on coinmarket, despite not redistributing the budget to master nodes.

The same for Zcash, although it does deliver a part to the developers.

I do not buy that theory that you sell, because the evidence is saying that only POW pump coins like Doge go up because Musk comes out talking about it.

Then doggy fashion coins, or ETH killers.

If pure POWs aren't gaining traction, it's not because of their master nodes.

I consider Dash to be out of fashion, and I hope that his core value work will sooner or later come to light.

This does not prevent me from disagreeing with many aspects of DCG and how to spend its budget, but it is what the master nodes choose, and I can only cast a negative vote out of more than 4000

a greeting

Are you seriously that confused ? I never even implied that the electric company was the investor. The exchange buyer is the investor.

No Tok, I really don't see the electric companies and the miner makers such as Bitmain as investors in the DASH network.  For example, the power company doesn't even know what purpose the power is being used for and they don't get the coins.  Paying people to hold allotments of 1000 DASH is the trick we have, it is what pushed DASH to over $1600 once upon a time and into the Top 3 of coins.  I would look to increasing that (staking) reward to help drive more investment into the coin.  I think you must be unfamiliar with DeFi?  You should research it, because that's how that sector exploded, the coins there otherwise have no value and no purpose.

Sure. And like the Titanic's 8-piece orchestra you'll still be parroting that mantra when we slide out of the top 100.

Miners are paid by outside investors, not some notional "Dash corporation" that you're inventing. They are paid to "secure" that investor's capital in the chain, not to secure the network from hacking. That happens to be a bi-product of the investment mechanism.

Even if 99.99% of coins are out of circulation and there are only 100 left the trading price can still be zip if there's no demand because "store-of-value" doesn't work. All bitcoin's supply in cold wallets is also "out of circulation". All litecoin's is, Monero etc.

Wake up.

MNOs are paid to hold DASH, reduce that payment and coins will be sold.  Miners are paid to secure the network, however, their importance was reduced somewhat with the advent of LLMQ CL and the fact we are the dominant X11 coin, this means we are able to divert some of their rewards into securing (from selling) the supply.

Not sure thats what I was meaning. For me most the voting on treasury spending is usually quite wasteful but thats not really what I'm talking about. That is small beans compared to..

The real vote that hurt dash  and continues to hurt dash every few minutes when a new block is mined was Ryans proposal to change the block reward in the opposite direction to that which was required. Which an overwhelming majority of economically illiterate masternode holders supported without realising it is strangling their golden goose.

Yes it was a small tweak. But of huge importance to the perception of Dash. A massive setback, either delaying the fix that needs to be done or blocking it entirely. Not to mention aggravating further an already serious problem. Even today most masternode holders still believe mining is expensive and serves little purpose. (To a proof of work blockchain!). Thanks Ryan Taylor for steering in the wrong direction. Either he is economically illiterate, blind leading the blind or he is ____ (fill in the blank)

 



In the future dash will be worth shit if they don't fix this. Masternode owners will probably vote for  giving themselves 80% of the block reward to meet non existant 'rising costs'. But that wont be needed anyway they'll be able to run on a rasberry Pi with an ssd drive attached.

But if I play along.. In the future if masternode cost have risen as you say. if they only receive say 5% instead of 50%. The astronomical value of dash by then will easily compensate for new hardware.


This coin is on the way to obscurity. There is nothing to lose by fixing this. Only to gain.

Masternodes are extremely greedy and will never part with their percentage of profits.
Everything is bad...

What complete hogwash.

Even at the current price, masternode operating costs would need to increase 800-1000% to justify the revenue they already receive. Those costs are fixed and don't increase with coin valuation like mining costs do so MN profits increase linearly with price. Meanwhile, difficulty reductions don't make mining more profitable (in the long run). The whole point of difficulty adjustments is to keep mining at a consistent and sustainable profit margin.

Also always remember this, in terms of the capital transmission mechanism:

1] mining "costs" represent investor capital being transmitted into the chain. They are not a "cost" in a literal sense

2] masternode costs AND profits represent investor capital being LOST from the chain for every reward coin realised

In the case of [2] the capital either goes into MN pockets or is lost to operating overheads. So Ryan had it exactly the wrong way around. The masternode reward is justified only insofar as it makes us more competitive (in terms of useability) over a fully mined coin and no more. Tanking the mining quota the way we have is like slapping a 50% handling fee on making a bank deposit. It is any wonder that investors choose more efficient options for storing their capital ?

That's about the only reason why we're now floundering at the bottom of the top 80. We can't even keep up with ETC. All these fully mined coins are surpassing Dash on ranking...on a permanent basis until we sort this out.

I agree with you that sometimes the master nodes seem to vote out of inertia and not thinking about the project or the long-term benefits.

Taylor for me, as CEO of DCG has had enough time to carry out a great project. It has had funds to hire dozens of developers, serious media, and much more.

On the contrary, he has focused on losing people's interest in a large project that is increasingly difficult to finance because its capitalization is falling in the table compared to other projects, even jokingly that capitalize twice or more than Dash.

On the other hand, you say that mining should receive more ... it is possible, but if in the future the Dash network requires that the master nodes provide more robust and expensive hardware, they will have to do so, if they need a connection to the faster network, they will have to do it, if they need more storage memory, they will have to do it ... this means that the master nodes, in the long term will have a more expensive maintenance, while mining is seeing the difficulty decrease day by day. day, making new miners more profitable.

The problem with Dash is that an overwhelming majority of the governors lead by the Dash Core Group CEO Ryan Taylor are completely economically illiterate.

Its such a shame for a promising project to be subject to such woeful leadership, by that I mean the masternode holders.

The block reward will never favour mining which is what is so badly needed. Because the clueless masternode holders won't propose or vote for less for themselves. To be gold like bitcoin you don't give away half the block reward to the governors.

The masternodes provide a service layer on top of a proof of work blockchain. The cost of this is half the block reward. That is far far too much.

Toknormal has explained in detail the mechanics of what is wrong with the current allocation of new minted coins many many times in many different ways. The fact that this overwhelming majority can't see the problem is why Dash is declining down the rankings.

And Ryan Taylor's leadership of Core Group should have been terminated a long time ago because he has been proven wrong by the market and the masternode count.

I can give you the example of ETH.

I have used ETH for DEFI many times and have been forced to have a higher or lower percentage of ETH in my metamask.

Right now I have some ETH but just thinking of using it for DEFI or to buy a token on the ETH network, I don't want ETH for something else.


If I wanted to accumulate ETH for something other than spending it, I would do it, but no, I don't. I only buy ETH when I need it.

I think Dash could be different if as I have said hundreds of times, your wallet gave holders 6% of the shared master node profit. For example, putting the wallet's Dash in a stacking option with a minimum period of 24 hours. In this way people would see their Dash as more than just money to spend quickly.



By the way, for me, marketing is reaching the whole world and not making memes that only those who are already involved in this see, or wrote four tweets a day, or always talking about the same thing with the same people.

Something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEjjufPd3Is

All the best