Right then we're drifting once more against BTC. This should not be happening.
Correlation.
Dash is a very powerful coin and it's getting destroyed by lack of thinking.
Some people are still thinking. This decision does not necessarily have the wide support of the MNO network. I think many people just don't understand the issue well enough.
The community must not congregate around a vote decision. It must think, review and continue to evolve around the decision. It must not allow itself to be gagged by a vote but rather use it as a platform to evolve and compete against other coins. Otherwise we'll just drown ourselves in our own governance mechanism. It was supposed to liberate thinking and make the coin more versatile, not castrate community thinking.
The decentralized governance system is created to come to a consensus and from a technical perspective it works well. The problem is the human element. There is no IQ test for running a masternode, there is no degree of economics (tokenomics) required for running an MN, yet that is what they needed to decide on. Combine that with an inefficient way of discussing and reaching a conclusion in a forum or live chat. I know well enough that sometimes it is difficult to make an argument or some MNOs become emotional and start name calling. It can be annoying as they don't provide any reasoning, just shouting a simplistic point of view that is not well thought through (miners are selling! we don't need PoW! PoW is an environmental disaster ...). Once it goes in a certain direction, the followers are just going along and echo what has been said. It can be exhausting to try and convince people who lack knowledge and act stubbornly. The inner circle around DCG is also sometimes a bit too defensive. Anyone who disagrees may end up in the troll bin sooner or later. It's not that different in other communities, but Dash can and should do better.
Dash has amazing prowess but underpowered due to its mining capacity being completely neutered by the protocol IMO. A bit like the most advanced Boeing that couldn't get off the ground because its engines were underpowered.
Again, it's not just this parameter that is keeping Dash down to some extent. Dash's potential for growth is enormous, especially with the upcoming Dash Platform / Dashpay, but we need to fire on all cylinders and yes ideally we get our economics fully optimized.
When are we going to get our mining power restored so we can all get behind this coin again ?
There is plenty mining power. The discussed problem is the high return for masternodes at the expense of miners who burn energy (proof of burn) to mint coins, which (in the oldskool PoW mining theory) determines their value to some extent and Dash now deviates even more from this view than before.
Why should Dash holders put up with strangulation of mining competitively just so that masternodes can earn holiday cruises ?
Focus on the convincing arguments. Show that Proof of Work (~highest block reward share for miners) leads to price increase.
Why can we not be aggressive, competitive and use our advantages to gain rankings against other mined coins ? Why do we have to put up with this stupid narrative that "managing traffic to order books" is all Dash can do to save itself ? Other coins are happy to have high volume trading (and can afford it because being 100% mined, the fiat they draw does not get dumped in holiday cruises, instead it gets invested straight into upwards difficulty adjustments across their ENTIRE blockchain which is the definition of store of value in crypto. That's why they enjoy investor preference over us).
Potentially stuck in flawed thinking which originates back to Evan Duffield. A genius idea that was pushed too far. Evan truly had extraordinary ideas and was willing to try highly innovative features, but that doesn't mean he was perfectly right about everything. These ideas were completely new for crypto and that is the power of Dash. We have had some truly extraordinary development for a so called altcoin. If you compare that to coins who are mainly sitting on their ass, pulling bitcoin commits and playing with some parameters (ahum Litecoin), then Dash is still one of the most remarkable projects in the crypto space.
Having said that, I continue to feel that 20% should have been the max and even at 20% the issue remains if price blows up. Some big brain should make a mathematical formula (dynamic algorithm) on how the block reward should be split. This would preferably be a semi long term objective (after DP) as it is quite complex. Arbitrary settings simply do not solve the problem we've been discussing, but decreasing the share for MNs as much as possible and as soon as possible, could lead to rapid and drastic improvement in terms of store of value. Afterwards hopefully something elegant could be implemented.
We have a budget that is the blockchain supply. New supply is being created every day. To me that supply should be directed optimally and aggressively at the three targets that can grow Dash:
1. wealth preservation (mining)
2. forward investment (treasury)
3. service protocol (masternodes) The cheapest but most competitive of the lot. Spend least, gain most.
That is what we are already doing. The whole discussion is who should get how much and you still haven't answered that. If the problem discussed is truly a downward pressure on our price, then we could gradually change the return for masternodes to around 5 to 10%. Same for the treasury 5 to 10%. Miners 80% to 90%.
It's just a terrible idea to change this (and change it again). This is the worst part of it. Poor analysis. Potentially worse results as a consequence. He should have let it rest for a while, until the bullish trend started. A lot was done under pressure of the harsh bear market and the constrained funding for DCG. That's when you take wrong decisions. If there are clear opposing views and you get feedback from intelligent people in the community that challenge the presented view, well then you put it on the back burner until things are more clear. He should also be well aware that many people are just going to follow along and it is usually not those that shout the loudest that are the brightest.
We are wasting HALF of our entire supply on the 3rd target when investors are interested in the 1st target.
We are not wasting half our supply. Tier two (MNs) is simply over incentivized. The concept is good, but the potential (counter intuitive) negative effect of over incentivizing is not well understood by several Dash MNOs, including DCG.
We could have both because masternodes have fixed costs. They're the only one of the three that can gain profitability from a price rise, yet the protocol is preventing us from availing ourselves of that huge competitive advantage over other coins. It's holding us back by rigging block reward margins in favour of the one stakeholder that can take them from price growth rather than supply growth.
Nodes only need to be profitable for us to compete successfully with bitcoin. No more. Bitcoin nodes don't even get their hosting costs paid. We don't need to spend our own blockchain budget on masternode profits because those are available from capital gain (from outside the Dash ecosystem) if we spend the budget wisely. Masternodes are long term holders. Treasury contractors and miners are short term holders. They do not benefit from capital gain.
So why are we bleeding the entire marketcap dry just to keep up this pretence of ROI measured in Dash so that capital losses can be hidden from the promotion to investors ? Why can we not offer them a protocol that's designed around inherent capital gain rather than numerical gain financed by real capital loss ? Even masternodes themselves are loosing their savings from these misplaced priorities because they have far more at stake in the form of node collateral than they gain in rewards.
They just need stronger arguments. Too many people in Dash don't recognize the value of Proof of Work other than "security". There are several people who stated out loud that we didn't need PoW anymore because we have ChainLocks. PoW is just waste to them. These people know nothing.
Things must be re-thought and reversed.
Yes. I would probably support going in the other direction. Still waiting for killer arguments though. You know the thing that Ryan Taylor was actually lacking to provide during his tokenomics. It's time to do your own toknormalenomics presentation.
We are going to die a slow death with such an impoverished mining capacity. *
Cut it with the negative hyperbole. This isn't going to convince anyone. Price appreciation has various mechanisms, we are only discussing one mechanism here which is potentially keeping us down.
Only the community can do it.
You need to convince DCG and the MNOs will follow. Therefore you need to show them (mostly Ryan Taylor I suspect) the error in their thinking. Since it seems to be a major concern to you, you will need to convince them that the "miners are selling more than masternode owners" is a poor and potentially totally irrelevant argument to justify this change in our economics. The change is almost entirely based on that point of view. Really, the thinking doesn't go much further than that. Otherwise, like I've already said, this will just be a pointless discussion.
* It's not the amount of hashpower that's the problem. Dash hashpower is growing. It's the fact that Dash protocol firewalls off that hashpower from half of its blocks. Half of its blocks are generated at zero difficulty regardless of how much hashrate Dash accumulates. Investors price that in. We need to spread it over more blocks to protect the scarcity of the supply
How do you come to the point of view that "investors are pricing that in"? Can you provide more substance to that statement? Apologies if you already clarified that in one of your previous posts.
Relevant links:Ryan Taylor - Improving Dash As A Store Of Value
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yylT6gAihcDash Core Group Presentation on Dash Economics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUf76R2V3pYBlog post by community member who was not impressed, but somehow still liked the idea of decreasing the split for miners.
https://bitedge.com/blog/ryans-dash-tokenomics-talk-was-poorly-timed-and-poorly-delivered/Blog post by mining company Luxor and petition against the change
https://medium.com/luxor/dash-block-reward-proposal-62204cf71c96https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dash-miner-reward-petition-2020
The rest, smoke and mirrors of people "too intelligent".
for office space which has been proven to be empty on every occasion a trusted member of the Dash community has visited their office. DCG Ryan Taylor and Glenn Austin have not answered my inquiries to this issue -remaining silent. We should not tolerate this type of waste of resource and we most definitely should not tolerate silence to valid questions asked on their spending. The 5th amendment rights are not applicable in decentralized funding I'm afraid. If you get money from the network you are accountable to the network and silence is not an acceptable response to valid inquiries. We need to stand up to this type of behavior from DCG who are the biggest spenders of the treasury funds. "
. ..the fallacy is absolutely incredible and unsustainable! ).
