how should coin developers be remunerated? - page 4.

defaced

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1014

Franko is Freedom

Quote from: cryptohunter on June 18, 2014, 09:42:46 AM

block tax 1% of every block. If they stop working on the coin it's forked and that tax is cut off or pushed to an address of a new developer that takes over and works on the coin.

premines and instamines need to be stopped at once.

I have thought about that many times.

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: Joe_Bauers on July 10, 2014, 11:12:30 AM

I haven't tested it out, but it seems that you could use lock_time to accomplish my proposal on the previous page. No?

See this thread for discussion, but, no.

The problem we found was that any taxation requires some transaction to be present (standard or non standard) in a block, any time you add a constraint like that any extending software (like mining software) needs to be modified to adhere to the constraint you added. This breaks compatibility, some coins may be happy with that, but it contradicts what we hope to achieve with Bitmark.

Joe_Bauers

hero member

Activity: 802

Merit: 1003

GCVMMWH

Quote from: coinsolidation on July 10, 2014, 12:16:29 AM

Quote from: Joe_Bauers on July 09, 2014, 09:30:22 PM

Quote from: coinsolidation on July 09, 2014, 03:36:29 PM

Quote from: PereguineBerty on July 09, 2014, 03:16:08 PM

So devs shouldn't receive anything for their time, effort and innovation....?

Any proposals as to how it can be done? We thought we had a reasonable approach, but we have had to abandon it

Are you saying in the linked post that you abandoned the idea because it hasn't yet been done?

No, it has been done before, and there are multiple ways to technically implement the concept including existing methods such as freicoin.

The problem is that any potential method of implementation reduces down to requiring a change to the block chain that would break compatibility with existing crypto currency software, at the very least mining and pool software would be affected, worst case far more.

Breaking compatibility is too much of a price to pay, so we are forced to abandon the taxation based development fund model.

I haven't tested it out, but it seems that you could use lock_time to accomplish my proposal on the previous page. No?

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

A new proposal, we'll call it a reverse IPO for now https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7764943

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: Joe_Bauers on July 09, 2014, 09:30:22 PM

Quote from: coinsolidation on July 09, 2014, 03:36:29 PM

Quote from: PereguineBerty on July 09, 2014, 03:16:08 PM

So devs shouldn't receive anything for their time, effort and innovation....?

Any proposals as to how it can be done? We thought we had a reasonable approach, but we have had to abandon it

Are you saying in the linked post that you abandoned the idea because it hasn't yet been done?

No, it has been done before, and there are multiple ways to technically implement the concept including existing methods such as freicoin.

The problem is that any potential method of implementation reduces down to requiring a change to the block chain that would break compatibility with existing crypto currency software, at the very least mining and pool software would be affected, worst case far more.

Breaking compatibility is too much of a price to pay, so we are forced to abandon the taxation based development fund model.

Joe_Bauers

hero member

Activity: 802

Merit: 1003

GCVMMWH

Quote from: coinsolidation on July 09, 2014, 03:36:29 PM

Quote from: PereguineBerty on July 09, 2014, 03:16:08 PM

So devs shouldn't receive anything for their time, effort and innovation....?

Any proposals as to how it can be done? We thought we had a reasonable approach, but we have had to abandon it

Are you saying in the linked post that you abandoned the idea because it hasn't yet been done?

boxuser

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Credits CRD 1st Decentralized Exchange coin

i guess people will never be happy and always complain about something and scream SCAM, and they look at seriously developing coins like for example Credits CRD see https://vimeo.com/100148381 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-credits-crd-with-20-decentralized-exchangeanonmarketmore-peak-july-2nd-634403 ]

and completely ignore it, the coin is launched and kept alive non stop and worked on and developed on very hard as much as i see the dev. is a decent guy and keeps telling people not to complain later once the new wallet version 2.0 is released, but what will happen? probably after he released version 2.0/ and the people who are now mining at the low diff right now, and believe in the coin and are confident in it, they will be happy and profit, but the same people who ignore it right now, will scream even then SCAM! and instamine and shit like that.

fact is they will always have something to bitch about, because it is a bunch of losers. and its the same people probably who invested in all those scam IPO's which is by all logical means very risky, and this guy brings a product and is ignored

fuckin people just dumb

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: PereguineBerty on July 09, 2014, 03:16:08 PM

So devs shouldn't receive anything for their time, effort and innovation....?

Any proposals as to how it can be done? We thought we had a reasonable approach, but we have had to abandon it

PereguineBerty

member

Activity: 109

Merit: 35

Quote from: From Above on June 18, 2014, 06:05:06 AM

None

~CfA~

So devs shouldn't receive anything for their time, effort and innovation....?

You must be a miner.

~PB~

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 18, 2014, 10:34:21 AM

0.125% of block reward and a halving transaction tax would do it.

This cannot be done.

We are back to the original question.

Keyboard-Mash

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Cross post ..

Quote from: Keyboard-Mash on June 19, 2014, 08:52:18 AM

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 19, 2014, 08:37:08 AM

Quote from: Keyboard-Mash on June 19, 2014, 08:18:31 AM

Don't know if it's mentioned yet ..

Paid developers Shocked

Yes we've already covered this in a different thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-should-coin-developers-be-remunerated-656720

In short:
No premine, instamine, or IPO.
0.125% of the block reward as a tax to the development team
50% of transaction fees, halving 3 times (25%, 12.5%, 6.25%) then dropping to 0.

Many have suggested a higher % of block reward (1%), we'll confirm the actual amount if/when we get to a final specification. It will certainly be under 0.5% though.

Sure that could work. But it doesn't cover third party development, which will be the main driving force in cryptocurrency penetration in this year and the following .. and not just one centralized development team.

How can you keep them from becoming entirely closed source? Toward my point, how would you solve the problem of privatized GPU miners cornering markets? Take a look at BBR right now, over 50% of the coin is mined by Christian and Christian alone. Not all the hard-coded centralized developer fees in the world can stop that, and he's currently in a position where he would require infinite money to open source or even distribute his software.

What then?

Japster

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

With lashings. Grin

Instamatic

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 18, 2014, 09:51:27 AM

Quote from: cryptohunter on June 18, 2014, 09:42:46 AM

block tax 1% of every block. If they stop working on the coin it's forked and that tax is cut off or pushed to an address of a new developer that takes over and works on the coin.

premines and instamines need to be stopped at once.

As somebody who's about to implement all of the ideas from these threads I feel an idiot saying it, but 1% is too high. 0.25% (0.125% + 0.125% locked) as mentioned before is plenty.

Plenty of pool sites charge a 1% fee to mine through their site/stratum. Perhaps 1% is too high for a developer but I do like the idea of a block tax because it incentivizes continued development and support. If a developer initiated a block tax of 1% from onset we may see less pools jumping onboard until the difficulty rose to a point that solo mining was highly inefficient (which of course depends on the algo/miner hash rate/network hash rate/exchange rate).

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

0.125% of block reward and a halving transaction tax would do it.

Thanks for your input guys, although please do share more if you have it.

Please also comment on my other open thread if you can https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7380974

Vivisector999

hero member

Activity: 541

Merit: 500

Well with a block tax, you really wouldn't need to lock half of it, since it's not a lump sum payment. But yeah a block tax of 0.5% or less would totally work as well.

But personally I think the best idea so far has been the Transaction fee tax. It is a very small payment, and the dev only gets paid if the coin goes big and is being used. If the dev can really push the coin, they could make a fortune (More than they are now with a big premine), but without alot of work, or if they leave early and let the coin die, they basically make nothing.

I know that would get me pounding the pavement trying to get vendors/exchanges to accept your coin.

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: cryptohunter on June 18, 2014, 09:42:46 AM

block tax 1% of every block. If they stop working on the coin it's forked and that tax is cut off or pushed to an address of a new developer that takes over and works on the coin.

premines and instamines need to be stopped at once.

As somebody who's about to implement all of the ideas from these threads I feel an idiot saying it, but 1% is too high. 0.25% (0.125% + 0.125% locked) as mentioned before is plenty.

cryptohunter

legendary

Activity: 2100

Merit: 1167

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG

block tax 1% of every block. If they stop working on the coin it's forked and that tax is cut off or pushed to an address of a new developer that takes over and works on the coin.

premines and instamines need to be stopped at once.

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: Este Nuno on June 18, 2014, 09:22:46 AM

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 18, 2014, 09:01:23 AM

I'd love to agree, but in practise this doesn't work - check the donation address on some of your favourite bitcoin software, almost every one I've ever checked has been 0.

It is surprising how many addresses I've checked and seen either zero or a few cents USD as the amount received.

That's why multibit started skimming transaction fees, haha.

Actually, there's an idea. Transaction fees or part of them anyway, going to the devs. Then if people actually are using the coin they get some money.

Another good idea.

Perhaps if it started as 50% of transaction fees, then halved each time the block halved such that miners gradually transitioned over to fees, and the developers away from fees.

The combination of that and the aforementioned % per block could work wonderfully together.

Este Nuno

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1002

amarha

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 18, 2014, 09:01:23 AM

I'd love to agree, but in practise this doesn't work - check the donation address on some of your favourite bitcoin software, almost every one I've ever checked has been 0.

It is surprising how many addresses I've checked and seen either zero or a few cents USD as the amount received.

That's why multibit started skimming transaction fees, haha.

Actually, there's an idea. Transaction fees or part of them anyway, going to the devs. Then if people actually are using the coin they get some money.

coinsolidation

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Bitmark Developer

Quote from: Joe_Bauers on June 18, 2014, 08:46:32 AM

0.125% hard coded to address that can be redeemed immediately

0.125% hard coded to address that can't be redeemed for at least 6 months after genesis block.

Anyone who says coin devs should not be vested in their coin seem to have no concept on how.... well.... anything works Wink

Devs having a pump and dump mentality are a HUGE part of the problem. If they have an incentive to stick around, maybe they will.

I was thinking along these lines too.. this seems reasonable, a small block reward that goes to a development pool. The addition of half locked seems good too.

Thank you for your input.

Quote from: bitcoinreactor on June 18, 2014, 08:54:36 AM

Quote from: coinsolidation on June 18, 2014, 06:04:31 AM

So as a community, what method of remuneration would you be happy with?

donations only.

I'd love to agree, but in practise this doesn't work - check the donation address on some of your favourite bitcoin software, almost every one I've ever checked has been 0.

Topic: how should coin developers be remunerated? - page 4. (Read 4687 times)