Only 12??? I voted last week lol, come on people. Vote!
One vote per account, everyone must do this!
Topic: [ANN][OC] Orangecoin ★★ POS ★★ Anon Transactions ★★ Masternodes - page 81. (Read 209551 times)
June 09, 2014, 11:37:48 PM
Only 12??? I voted last week lol, come on people. Vote!
One vote per account, everyone must do this!
June 09, 2014, 11:36:56 PM
Only 12??? I voted last week lol, come on people. Vote!
June 09, 2014, 10:50:02 PM
June 09, 2014, 06:33:46 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Auction off first 10 nodes. take the average price of those. Edit: but we need to determine the specs behind the mn before we can auction them.
Very good, thanks jim
June 09, 2014, 05:58:15 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Auction off first 10 nodes. take the average price of those. Edit: but we need to determine the specs behind the mn before we can auction them.
June 09, 2014, 05:18:03 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Your very right the free market will set this, because 2 variables remade constant and 1 will change. The constants will be OC amount req. and rewards paid out, the variable will be the amount of masternodes. This also changes based on the price of the coin, if the price of the coin goes up (amount cost MN start up) so does the value of the rewards earned.
Masternodes are almost a form of mining, the more the rewards are worth them more MN are set up based also on how much is cost to set one up. But the best part of this kind of "mining" is ppl don't go out and pay some random online supplier for "mining" equipment. They come to you the stake holders to buy the OC at what ever price you all decided to sell them at. So all the money/ value stays in the coin.
And the $4000 figure will fade out of history with all fiat. This is part of the transition, and will be realized when the cost hits $10k for 1 'any-coin' and it wakes people up to crypto, by then, fiat portfolios will be worthless as everyone runs to crypto....
For sure!!! at that point ppl will run to turn fiat into crypto while the cost is raising!!!
Guys there is no need to make more work out of this then needs to be, what you are trying to do with this auction will happen on its own, once we set the numbers.
June 09, 2014, 05:12:23 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Auction off first 10 nodes. take the average price of those. Edit: but we need to determine the specs behind the mn before we can auction them.
June 09, 2014, 04:38:49 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Auction off first 10 nodes. take the average price of those. Edit: but we need to determine the specs behind the mn before we can auction them.
June 09, 2014, 04:37:49 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
Your very right the free market will set this, because 2 variables remade constant and 1 will change. The constants will be OC amount req. and rewards paid out, the variable will be the amount of masternodes. This also changes based on the price of the coin, if the price of the coin goes up (amount cost MN start up) so does the value of the rewards earned.
Masternodes are almost a form of mining, the more the rewards are worth them more MN are set up based also on how much is cost to set one up. But the best part of this kind of "mining" is ppl don't go out and pay some random online supplier for "mining" equipment. They come to you the stake holders to buy the OC at what ever price you all decided to sell them at. So all the money/ value stays in the coin.
And the $4000 figure will fade out of history with all fiat. This is part of the transition, and will be realized when the cost hits $10k for 1 'any-coin' and it wakes people up to crypto, by then, fiat portfolios will be worthless as everyone runs to crypto....
For sure!!! at that point ppl will run to turn fiat into crypto while the cost is raising!!!
June 09, 2014, 04:20:50 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
I don't see how it is possible to set these amounts reasonably in the future without knowing the future.We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
And since when does the free market not compensate for an increase in start up cost, or any other hiccup.
If you need extra honey on a deal to get ppl interested, you pour it on, then the supply and demand takes over from there. This is in fact the only way to even discover the true price of Mnodes. Only a free market can tell us, anyone else would be guessing (with very little hope of being correct).
June 09, 2014, 04:04:48 PM
This is why a set amount from the start to finish IS necessary, biding would cause way to much uncertainty for future returns.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
We set the amount the masternodes receive. Then based on the amount req. to set one up and the constant return, Dictates how many masternodes people will set up. No one out there will come along and set up a masternode if adding their MN to the count divides rewards past the point of profit. So from the start we just set up the req. amount and the reward amount, from there the amount of masternodes that people will set up will depend on how many are already up and how many are left before it is no longer profitable. This number must stay constant and predictable.
June 09, 2014, 03:50:37 PM
June 09, 2014, 03:31:58 PM
June 09, 2014, 01:43:31 PM
June 09, 2014, 01:42:14 PM
June 09, 2014, 01:33:03 PM
June 09, 2014, 01:09:48 PM
Just a simple comparaison :
Bittrex last price : 0.00000436 BTC
Kingcoiny last price : 0.00000533 BTC
Bittrex best buys orders : 0.00000435 BTC
Kingociny best buys orders : 0.00000520 BTC
Make the good choice, choose Kingcoiny > https://www.kingcoiny.com/index.php?page=trade&market=OC
the best,
Ben
Bittrex last price : 0.00000436 BTC
Kingcoiny last price : 0.00000533 BTC
Bittrex best buys orders : 0.00000435 BTC
Kingociny best buys orders : 0.00000520 BTC
Make the good choice, choose Kingcoiny > https://www.kingcoiny.com/index.php?page=trade&market=OC
the best,
Ben
June 09, 2014, 01:05:44 PM
June 09, 2014, 01:00:37 PM
End PoS early to pay for Mnodes and leave cap at 200 million and leave all other specs the same. This hurts only those people now who would be holding coins for those last remaining years of PoS if they intended on holding the coins for the full 46 years. Price will remain the same, value of what's in circulation remains the same, oc:btc price curve will be on target. This way also benefits no one, versus the select holders if we reduced the cap
This is a good paragraph. 46 years would take the sting out.It wouldn't be 46 years, that's what it is now. We'd shorten POS to 39-40 years, if this option is chosen.
Yet there is still a price for current investors, remember... all new coins created for rewards will reduce holder equity (now not in 46 years), while coins minted do not reduce equity, provided the holder is minting.
hmmm we have 3 kinds of oranges here
ppl trying to make the sweetest deal they can for their planned Mnodes
ppl trying to preserve the equity that was promised when they bought into the coin
and the devs caught in the middle
I'm more worried about overpaying the Mnodes than under. OC pointed out yesterday that the price of orange is going up, 10x and more. so maybe we should have some way to adjust the Mnodes rewards, keep them fat and happy but not obscene.
What I highlighted in orange is exactly what I was getting at, but you said it much better.
Edit: Your next thought, The 'price paid by investors' would be 20% divided by 39-40 years, going back to the orange highlight comment.
June 09, 2014, 12:47:39 PM
End PoS early to pay for Mnodes and leave cap at 200 million and leave all other specs the same. This hurts only those people now who would be holding coins for those last remaining years of PoS if they intended on holding the coins for the full 46 years. Price will remain the same, value of what's in circulation remains the same, oc:btc price curve will be on target. This way also benefits no one, versus the select holders if we reduced the cap
This is a good paragraph. 46 years would take the sting out.It wouldn't be 46 years, that's what it is now. We'd shorten POS to 39-40 years, if this option is chosen.
Yet there is still a price for current investors, remember... all new coins created for rewards will reduce holder equity (now not in 46 years), while coins minted do not reduce equity, provided the holder is minting.
hmmm we have 3 kinds of oranges here
ppl trying to make the sweetest deal they can for their planned Mnodes
ppl trying to preserve the equity that was promised when they bought into the coin
and the devs caught in the middle
I'm more worried about overpaying the Mnodes than under. OC pointed out yesterday that the price of orange is going up, 10x and more. so maybe we should have some way to adjust the Mnodes rewards, keep them fat and happy but not obscene.
Jump to: