Intention process. It's just a meme. I figured it was kind of funny, but I guess it triggers some people.
I couldn't care less about merit points. That system is completely flawed.
- Old accounts received merit according to their status, not because of high quality posts they made.
- People with merit only give merit to posts they like. Quality criticism will receive no merit.
- It creates an echo chamber where people say what they think people want to hear. Reddit has exactly the same problem.
So after one meme, you decide that I hate Ryan Taylor? I don't.
I don't do Twitter. My other post has nothing to do with Trump. There is a reason why people are shifting capital into the crypto space and it's not because governments and financial institutions are doing such a great job. If they were, Satoshi would never have created Bitcoin. My country now has 120% debt versus GDP and zero interest rates on savings accounts. People's savings are being wrecked and there is no real escape for ordinary people other than considering a risky move into crypto. Most people are completely clueless as to how the world works or what goes on.
If Ryan Taylor's store of value analysis is wrong, he may have made things worse. Any CEO who makes a capital mistake should be fired.
I'm worried that our 'base economics layer' is parameterized in a way that provides continuous down pressure on price. There is no serious influx of money to set up new masternodes, but masternodes continue to have a high return no matter what happens.
We have a design that deviates strongly from Bitcoin. Our design is unique and provides undeniable benefits, but we should not pretend it is perfect.
There are clear indications in my opinion (and others) that the recent change will make things worse. My initial assessment of Ryan's tokenomics in 2019 was that it was flawed.
I was very worried about the intent to move away from the oldskool way of thinking, which is that a (100%) Proof of Work mining model (and the cost involved) pushes price upwards.
I countered toknormal's statements and point of view here on bitcointalk, so he could give a more convincing explanation. With the insight into 'total network cost' which translates into a 'hidden transaction cost' it has become more clear that it's likely true that high masternode revenues actually provide continuous downward pressure on the price.
Masternode revenue can be dumped at any price. Miners need a high price.
There is probably truth in the statement that "price finds an equilibrium around its production cost (with a slight margin)".
I love Dash, but I'm very open to criticism. Blind faith will not get us to where we want to go.
You don't really discuss any of the points that are brought up. You make attempts to counter some elements and ignore everything else.
Ignoring people is a sign of weakness.
The Dash community should welcome diversity of opinion and not always be so defensive when someone deviates from the "consensus".