Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 27. (Read 1058927 times)

First of all to make things clear, Mark you have your DVC tokens that represent something in your game and your own assets like GFC, etc. But sometimes in your language you seem to say that all Devcoin holders are playing in your game or even that the Devcoin Foundation has some debt to pay to you or your game, so you come time after time stating that there is a zillionary debt. Who are the debtors? You alone, the players? everybody holding Devcoin coins? Can you clarify that for everybody in this thread?

Now, regarding the following:


I propose to burn the coins because Devcoin has infinite supply programmed in the core and we can't change that. Rather the tokens have limited supply or at least more supply needs to be created on purpose by the issuer.

Regarding how to exchange DeVCoin Tokens back for Devcoin coins, we have all the Devcoin holders that sum up a huge reserve of coins altogether, so we have enough stock available in the wild! Any individual can release their own "community-DeVCoin" tokens and say: Hey, do you want real Devcoins? buy any amount of my tokens and I'll transfer the equivalent of real Devcoin coins to your wallet. Presto! The difference is that "official" DeVCoin tokens issued by the Devcoin Foundation have intrinsic value by themselves, while community-DeVCoins represent an asset if that is the issuer intention, just like you are already doing Mark.

- develCuy

I think it is a good plan, too! I like the idea of tokens and to give DVC a growing momentum. I think also that burning coins could be a good solution.

The idea of burning coins to back a token based on them seems a bit weird compared to actually having the coins on hand to redeem the tokens for real coins.

Kind of hard to figure how the token is supposed to be worth anything when the coins it supposedly represents have been burned.

At least with the existing tokens I can redeem them for actual on the blockchain coins.

Also, we definitely DO need more DeVCoin tokens, as I have written before.

There simply are not enough of them on the platform(s) to make it reasonable to require people paying DeVCoin-denominated debts to pay them IN DEVCOIN.

Just looking at the last two payments made to GFC against loans I see 123+ million and 138+ million devcoins of debt paid respectively, but no way was there that many actual DeVCoins available for the debtor to have been able to buy actual DeVCoins to make those payments with; they were made with General Retirement Funds (GRF) scrip if I recall correctly. Ideally the debtor should have been able to buy that many DeVCoins using the GRF scrip or whatever other currencies they have been using then pay actual DVC to GFC. Those two payments were not even unusually large.

If it were practical for GFC to insist on being paid IN DEVCOINS, it would soak up huge numbers of DeVCoins quite rapidly I expect, to the point where it would maybe have to become the primary seller of them just to enable the debtors to be able to obtain enough of them to make their payments with. So possibly just GFC alone could solve the whole "DVC has no value" conundrum provided there were in fact plenty of DeVCoins in play. Basically DeVCoin has pretty much killed all its own value by throwing all its coins to pretty much any useless thing other than the game which was created and developed over all these years specifically for the purpose of giving DeVCoins value.

-MarkM-

I'm all for the plan you've come up with. It may need some more fleshing out and refinement but I think that it's a solid plan and would help achieve everything we need in terms of helping DVC become more desirable, thus building up a reason for people to create new use cases (such as gaming sites, shops, etc.), creating a cyclic effect.

I think that we can do both approaches. We could support two tokens as a project: DeVCoin and DeVDollar for two different purposes:

- DeVCoin token: speculative, free & wild market!
- DeVDollar token: stable coin for paying beneficiaries

In regards to "stable coin", we could use the trusted USDT token on Stellar: https://stellar.expert/explorer/public/asset/USDT-GCQTGZQQ5G4PTM2GL7CDIFKUBIPEC52BROAQIAPW53XBRJVN6ZJVTG6V

This is what could happen on every Devcoin round:

- Buy X amount of USDT with external reserves(STEEM, HIVE, SBD, HBD, etc)
- Use half of available USDT to buy DevCoin (build up the buy side)
- Put the other half into the treasury and release an equivalent amount of DeVDollars (1:1 ratio)

Eventually, if we need to issue more DeVCoin tokens, the Devcoin Foundation should burn as much as required Devcoins (the actual coins) from its own reserve (OpenSourceFund + friends).

- develCuy

On Interstellar exchange, by pressing [∞] you can see list of "all" assets: https://interstellar.exchange/app/#/markets/guest  
If somebody wants to try it, you will need to narrow down the spread, and increase the volume in order for it to actually show up in that tab (and be filterable by "market search" feature). I'm not sure what the target volume and spread numbers are for it to show up there, but I was told by their team that the algo includes these variables. Also not sure when the computation occurs, so maybe we'll need to give it some time after few trades.

Here is presumably most relevant trade pair for this thread:  
https://interstellar.exchange/app/#/trade/guest/DVC/GBHAQ252S4Z4AQOM4BWIRC3UHAOJIKCZQBUJGD336YH2O7W2NKRXMHA5/XLM/native

It would be practical for similar pairs to actually be searchable within this somewhat easy-to-use client, because it seems like a relatively complicated process (for your average joe) to actually find the asset issuer, and then find the pair manually by using the relevant info.

---

Btw, company shares are only on Horizon platform I think. You could use this client to access it: https://github.com/NeXTHorizon/hz-source

The problem is what are the actual dollars you are going to use to buy back the devdollars?

I have seen a number of schemes whereby they attempt to use their coin as collateral to somehow create supposed stablecoins, but they are not really anywhere near as stable as their whitepapers make them sound.

I still think what we need to do is keep building the buy sides as strong as possible, the approach I have described before has worked over and over and over again not only tending the value up and up and up but also yielding more and more of the coin back again to bury in the backyard or wherever; that is, it takes more and more of the coin out of circulation while growing the value per coin of those still piled up on the exchanges as huge buy side and sell side columns of offers.

Unless you are going to have an actual "treasury" of dollars with which to "back" coins as dollar-tokens it is hard to really assert your coin is fixed at a dollar, but you can always keep building the buy-side stronger (denser) than the sell-side and strive toward eventually having a buy-side large enough and deep enough that all the outstanding coins (those not yet buried in the back yard as it were) can eventually be sold to it.

Also your idea seems to isolate DeVCoin, trying to have it stand alone instead of being a part of a rich tapestry of inter-related assets that all support one another and provide a hopefully ever-growing number of routes out to fiat or other various economies (though mostly fiat, realistically, since most users do tend to be from "the planet known as Earth" so have that bias of in the long run tending to want to ship their gains back to Earth).

If you want to have dollars why not simply use one of the actually-backed-by-real-dollars stablecoins as the dollar side and build up your buy-side of those stronger and stronger until you can buy back all outstanding DeVCoins with those at whatever dollar value per DeVCoin you are targetting or are able to actually achieve given the size of your dollars buy-side column of offers?

Right now we are having a snag in building up our buy-side due to DVC being paired against bitcoin; however we have several other coins, and not only ones that are mined right alongside DeVCoins, in which it is still reasonable and feasible to build up their buy-sides, which to my mind shows one of the strengths of using many coins. When one or more of them, in this case DeVCoin, hits a snag due to the vagaries of "exchanges", no problem we can simply continue along by using any or all of our other coins that are also on exchanges.

That is also why I have all along suggested that the other coins should be among the free open source projects that we support. We should be trying to keep them all up to date and keep them all having enough nodes to function and so on. We should not be competing against our other coins but, rather, co-operating with them.

We can build up buy-sides of everything in Lumens, sure, I in fact already started doing that some time ago, although now that Lumens have gone up in value I am looking at having to get back in there and check all my offers since it is possible Lumens might be going up in value faster than the other side of the pairs so my offers might suddenly be looking more generous than I can afford if I do not keep an eye on them.

You can already right now start helping build the XLM buy-side against DeVCoin and a bunch of our other assets on the STELLAR platform, see http://makemoney.knotwork.com/stellar/

A big advantage of the STELLAR platform is we can also build all the pairs, everything against everything, if we choose, as Lumens do not insinuate themselves into every trade like HZs do on the HORIZON platform.

-MarkM-

Mark, first of all thanks for the feedback.

I know that you issued tokens already, but my concern is that they are arbitrarily generated in a fixed amount. Rather I prefer to create an "Stable TOKEN" that we can trade for a USD-pegged token (here Lumens just for the examples), that way people getting the tokens will have time and peace of mind for trading them at a minimum market value. For that very reason the number of tokens released on every round should be variable. Also, I think that we should not generate new tokens if we don't need them. For example, say that at the beginning of round 107 the Devcoin Foundation issues 10 DevDollars, they are paid to the beneficiaries and they manage to trade all their DevDollars for Lumens at the rate offered by DF. Since DF is the issuer and buyer at the same time, it will get the 10 DevDollars back during round 107. What will happen on round 108? say that DF needs to pay another 10 DevDollars to beneficiaries, then it will pay from balance, since it is not necessary to issue new DevDollars. In a more realistic scenario, some beneficiaries will hold their DevDollars or offer them for sale at a higher rate than DF's. Say that 5 DevDollars get back to DF and 5 DevDollars stay on hold by beneficiaries. Then, on round 108 DF will issue 5 DevDollars to complete the required 10 so that it can complete all payments. Another case is when DF starts to hold DevDollars, if it has to pay only 2 DevDollars on round 108, but there are 5 available in the wallet, it will only order 2 DevDollars back from the market. So, 3 DevDollars will stay on hold for round 109.

Sounds like a plan?

- develCuy

GFC can act as a way of "earning" DVC because of the fact that its value is mostly based upon its portfolio of DVC-based debts that are owed to it.

These debts are "secured" by the various FreeCiv-based nations that are actively working toward building defensive shells around the galaxy or galaxies in which the FreeCiv-based planets are located.

This effort is spearheaded by the (galactic) United Nations, whose most powerful constituents so far are the Brits, the Canucks and the Martians.

Thus right there you see there are at least four of the most significant galactic currencies basically aligned behind it all: United Nations Script (UNS), United Kingdom Britcoin (UKB), Canadian Digital Notes (CDN) and Martian BotCoin (MBC), in addition to DeVCoins themselves (which, by the way, have all along been considered one of the "big seven" Galactic currencies).

Admittedly the loans got off to a rocky start by being given out to random internet passers-by who chose to participate in mining galaxies far far away, with most of those passers-by vanishing after doing mostly nothing whatsoever with their newly created mining colonies.

However after about a "Planet Known as Earth" year (corresponding to about twelve game-years presumably) the powers that be (aka the United Nations and its main constituents) decided it was time to "repo" all the colony Corps that had not been logged into for at least a year, and they proceeded to recruit "Galactic Repo Corps" to take on those debts and run those colonies and continue to make payment on those loans.

So although a lot of those loans grew huge during that initial year, they have all been back to receiving payments for Earth-years (not game years) now.

The governments of the civilised planets are committed to this massive defense project because the existence of O-game and so called O-game clones shows us that the multiverse is indeed full of extremely hostile things out there somewhere, so rings of O-game clone implemented galaxies are being fortified around the "home galaxy" or "home galaxies" to defend against any eventual incursions from O-games far far away.

Because there are typically about twelve game-years to a "real" (non-game) year, the interest rates might seem a little high to Earthlings (players), but in game time terms they are of course twelve times less so maybe not really "unreasonably high" in their actual (which is to say, in-game) context.

I believe they are basically about a quarter of a percent per actual non-game calendar day, calculated as hourly compounding with any fraction of an hour accounted as a full hour.

Hourly was chosen in case the same processes end up being used to deal with leverage style loans / moneymarket-accounts types of thing where someone might for example want to borrow something for a few hours to short it or something like that.

Obviously of course this is all within a game, the Galactic Milieu; if it all turns out to work well gosh knows what paperwork would be needed to proceed from this in-game prototyping to some kind of real-world similar set of constructs.

So the upshot of all this is that you can buy GFC shares and list them for sale at a higher price, and wait for someone to come along and buy them at that higher price, fully expecting that at least in DeVCoins the value will indeed be higher since the debts it is collecting on are denominated in DeVCoins.

It is partly to facilitate the continued and hopefully regular presence of buyers that I have suggested the "DVC Foundation" proposed as recipient of the lion's share of minted DeVCoins take up regular buying of GFC shares. However even if that ends up not happening presumably there should always be bargain-hunters "out there" willing to snap up the shares as and when the sell offer prices get caught up to and exceeded by the value of the shares.

I regret in fact that I have so little time myself to keep scouring the markets looking for bargains after each new "Latest Rates" include-file is published. I have noticed in passing some pretty extreme bargains building up through the last few generations of the "Latest Rates".


-MarkM-

Okay, awesome. I just wanted to make sure! I was removed from my admin duties (despite hosting the Receiver files as I was notified in the past), which sucks, but I accept it. Is there any way to continue earning DVC now? My other duties were all related to DevTome so I'm assuming I have nothing coming in anymore, .

We already have dDVC (digi-DeVCoin) "tokens" on HORIZON and STELLAR networks, based originally on the dDVC on the Digitalis Open Transactions server.

Furthermore a "DVC Holdings" aka "DVC Treasury" account already exists on HORIZON holding assets whose total supposed value can be added up and that total divided by the number of DeVCoins minted to arrive at a supposed value per DeVCoin.

A problem generically across all of the various assets used in such "treasuries" and more assets whose value is computed from them but tht are not themselves used in such "treasuries" is that very few of the assets have lately been listed on any of the usual public website-based "exchanges" the crypto community is used to.

This has resulted in skewing of prices, and thus arbitrage oppotunities, caused by the players who want to "cash out" to "Planet Known As Earth" fiat currencies having very few routes toward such "cashing-out" and thus driving up the actual "spot prices" on these platforms of the assets that are listed on the familiar type of "exchanges" and, on those exchanges, a driving down of the actual "spot prices" of those actual coins on those familiar exchanges.

This is a large part of why it is good to have more of our coins listed on such exchanges.

The more coins any "cashing out" activity can be spread amongst, the lower the impact "cashing out" ought to be able to have on any one such coin.

Right now for example I know off-hand that DVC, IXC, I0C, USF (aka SCIFI), KED, GPL2, AXIOM and QBT are all listed on one or more of the usual familiar website-type public "exchanges", thus all of them are possible routes toward "cashing out", so I would expect their "spot prices" on HORIZON and STELLAR platforms to be inflated as players compete to be first/cheapest to "cash out", and their "spot prices" on the "exchanges" to be somewhat suppressed by that same "cashing out" activity.

This in turn means that folks who are aiming at "cashing out" into "Planet Known As Earth" funds tend to be seeing actual cashed-out values of all these assets end up at End Of Day to be substantially lower than the computed relative-values calculated for these assets based on the "treasuries" system.

For example, the computed supposed value of IXC based on its "treasury" is about 21.5 cents Canadian or so, but on FreiExchange its highest recent value was someone buying it up to 650 satoshis, and subsequent filling back up of buy and sell sides has its lowest sell price current at 570 satoshis and highest buy offer at 520 satoshis, which is bitcoin was worth 10,000 dollars each would come to 5.7 cents (of whichever kind of dollars bitcoin was worth 10,000 of) and 5.2 cents repsectively.

So we can see that for someone thinking of "cashing out" by way of IXC, they would see all the computed relative values (e.g. the "Latest Rates" file and all the tables and plots based on it) as being too high by a factor of four or five or six or so, that is, that if they tried to actually cash out, by way of IXC, they could only expect to yield a quarter to a sixth or so of the value indicated in those files and tables and plots and such.

The more we strengthen the buy-sides on those usual website-type public "exchanges", and the more of our coins we do so for, the better the cashing-out picture should eventually look. I have gotten IoC and IXC up to a dollar a coin at least twice maybe more times, it is just a matter of time but then typically a hack or a fly-by-night exchange blows it and I have to start from scratch all over again.

With IXC and I0C I am helped by the fact that they do not mint a lot of new coins constantly.

With DVC the sheer number of new DVC being minted constantly undermines the prices seen on exchanges.

The Corp whose mandate is specifically to support and strengthen the value of DVC is "DeVCorp".

The Corp, created by DeVCorp, that seems to be actually accomplishing the most is General Financial Corp, GFC; it holds a huge amount of DVC-denominated debt.

It seems to me that shares of those two Corps could make a lot of sense as something the "DVC Foundation" could buy to "lock up" DeVCoins.

If almost all shares of DVC minted went to buying such shares, that would keep DVC off the market while still rewarding supporters of the coin. You can see historical calculated-values of both shares of DeVCorp (sDVC) and shares of General Financial Corp (sGFC) at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/sharesindvc.html

The Foundation could also list the shares back on the sell side as it acquires them, building stacks of sell offers higher and higher ready to get bought when (or if) the prices climb.

So in short, we already have tokens and we already have stuff set up for binding coins into Corps to keep them off the market, you-lot just haven't been fully utilising them.

-MarkM-

Yeah, don't forget that I'm on the same boat. Just to make things clear, in my proposal I'm talking about money not in your pocket: newly generated coins & coins in the OpenSourceFund+friends. I'm not proposing anything for existing coins that aren't controlled by the Devcoin Foundation, yet.

- develCuy

I'm a bit confused about something in this proposal: what happens with coins that already exist? I know there's fear about whales having a lot of coins but keep in mind that some of us spent YEARS helping build the site, contributing, and spending countless hours on administration work. On top of that, some of us that spent the majority of our time working on the project have still sold exactly ZERO Devcoins. So while I get the fear aspect, it's important to remember that some of us believed in the old project so much that even as it tanked we held tight (and accumulated more coins on the market), rather than trying to cash out. Anything that would push coins out of whales' wallets is only a punch in the face to those who relentlessly worked to help the project and took zero remuneration due to wanting to see it succeed.

Hey everybody,

The world has changed so badly that things are never going to be same ever, so we should change plans, strategy, objectives and so on. The change is not only affecting our jobs and personal lives, it is also reshaping (and reviving) the cryptocurrency market. We are in a global crisis indeed, we are now living in a new world! What can we do with the Devcoin project then? Well, I need your input to the following ideas:

Let me share with you my strong interest on an idea proposed for so long by Mark: Devcoin as a token. We were actually going towards that goal but COVID-19 came first along the fork of STEEM, which brought HIVE and blah blah blah. Long history short: we need to look for a safer place to release Devcoin tokens. Mark proposed to release in the Stellar network, something that makes a lot of sense but lets explore more alternatives. How about TRON? ETH? EOS?... I'm keen to hear proposals, pros and cons. Community, can you share your feedback here?

Who needs another token out there?

Another very important idea IMHO is to understand why do we need a Devcoin Token. There are many reasons but let me share what I consider the most important and I'll do my best to be clear. Devcoin is 9 years old, its source code is a 99% based on on aged Bitcoin fork and it is only differentiated by a philanthropic distribution system, where miners get 10% of block rewards and the other 90% should be distributed to different people (see: http://www.devtome.com/devtome_stats). Devcoin managed to have some position in the crypto market, at least good enough to trade Devcoins at any time. Unfortunately, many things contributed to the destruction of Devcoin's market value and we also have a small number of people that managed to hold huge reserves of Devcoin, let's call them whales for short.

The situation with whales is a key aspect

We know that there has been a HUGE number of Devcoins going round after round to people "contributing" to Devtome when it was kind of abandoned. That's why the administrators decided to set a temporal moratorium and later we tried to move it into the STEEM blockchain so that we can implement a fair distribution system, with content curation and a bigger ecosystem. Well, that is old history now. At EOD what really matters is that there is STRONG FEAR for a whale (or whales) that come and dump the value of Devcoin as soon as we try to build it up. Somebody seems to be taking unfair advantage of all our efforts as a project!

Let's fix this! How about forking the blockchain?

Oh, wait, there is another key aspect here. Miners don't show any interest on forking and there aren't other miners interested on Devcoin, so we are basically stuck with the blockchain that we have. Things are like they are right now. We have some people that earned a BIG amount of Devcoins in a questionable way and we can't change that, unfortunately.

What can we do then?

Short answer: Lets release Devcoin Tokens in a NEW market! Long answer: Remember all funds we are holding into the OpenSourceFund wallet and friends? Well, how about "burning" them in exchange for Devcoin Tokens? Let's say that we find a very safe way to "burn" them so that nobody can ever use them. It means that we can start over in a new market with a renewed and fair distribution system!

Voilà! Presto! Eureka! ... Not so fast...

How can we give Devcoin Tokens some intrinsic value if they are purely based on the broken Devcoin market value?

Who said that? We do still have some assets out there. The @devcoin and @devtome accounts at STEEM and HIVE hold some funds. The devcoin.org and devtome.com websites still have some traffic that we can use for marketing the new token, and the most important: We still have people willing to contribute to the project. As long as we have that, we can find a good strategy to build up the value of the future Devcoin tokens.

Quick idea for building up the value of Devcoin tokens

Inspired on STEEM, EOS and HIVE, we can have Devcoins in the blockchain and DevDollars as a token. Then, we burn Devcoins as they are generated (lets say that we burn 100 million Devcoins on every round), in the other side we release DevDollars. We should then have a helper market in a token based network, where we can exchange the other Token (Lumens?) for DevDollars. The Devcoin Foundation should release an X amount of DevDollars, pay them to the beneficiaries along a buy order for that amount of DevDollars. That is how we guarantee a minimum value for DevDollars. Speculators will have to buy at a higher rate and the winner will always be the beneficiaries.

How many DevDollars should Devcoin Foundation release on every round?

We should first resolve how to buy Lumens! We'll have to use our funds (SBD & HBD) at STEEM and HIVE to buy Lumens, then we can make numbers. Since we are talking about "dollars" here, we could pair the value of DevDollars with USD Dollars. For example, if we have $10 USD worth of Lumens, then the Devcoin Foundation can release up to $10 DevDollars that given round. All in all, it means that we have just burned 100 million Devcoins for $10 DevDollars.

Many raw ideas here, I look forward to your feedback.

Go go Devcoin!

- develCuy

Guys just a short PSA, the Freiexchange has a working DVC/BTC market. Just a friendly reminder that DVC is still listed in there and you can buy and sell as much as you want  

Ok, that seems good news to me.

It seems the dvdnode.org domain somehow got renewed for anoher year, I think maybe I was automatically billed for it or something and my bank account happened to actually have money in it at that moment.

Or maybe some third party anonymously paid the renewal fee, I don't know what exactly happened but WHOIS evidently shows I have it for another year.

So presumably the hostnames at dvcnode.org should keep working for another year yet.

-MarkM-

The second option worked for me. I had to create the devcoin.conf file as it didn't already exist, but it worked and my wallet is all synced up

I can't get to my windows wallet version 1.0.16 to sync it because I am overseas right now but will it be affected by these changes discussed? I don't run nodes or know how to compile wallets.

Thanks for the clarification Mark! It means that we have a workaround solution for old wallets that depend on your expiring dvcnode.org domain name. Both the command line and devcoin.conf allow to add known seed nodes other than the hardcoded (your old subdomains dvcstable01, dvcstable02, dvcstable03, ...). Long history short, instructions:

- In the command line, add the params -seednode=hostname to devcoind comand (typically for devcoind instances). For example:


OR alternatively:

- In the configuration file devcoin.conf, add the following:


People running old versions of devcoin client (v0.8.5 and older), please confirm that with the methods above you can still sync with the network.

- develCuy