Topic: How to evenly distribute a new currency in an economically sound manner? (Read 430 times)
August 24, 2016, 06:11:18 PM
To make such distribution you should make maybe a faucet allowing each wallet to get 1 coin, but it would result in a single person make 100 accounts and claim more coins, giving 50 units by referal will make the distribution unfair, better without comission and id why would we expose our identy, if the most of us like to be anonymous.
August 24, 2016, 07:29:00 AM
I understand that you are just discussing the theoretical possibilities of evenly distributing a new currency. But I don't understand why this should be a desirable goal. Even if your initial distribution is even, money will soon accumulate at a relatively small number of people after your measures end. The reason is human behavior: Only few people have the personality traits that are necessary to accumulate wealth. The majority is spending too much or even living beyond their means.
Another question is, if your new currency would be attractive to potential users in the first place. I doubt that. It is burdened with restrictions and surveillance measures that scares off any freely thinking individual. The only class of people that I can imagine being supportive of it are those who support a socialist dictatorship.
ya.ya.yo!
Another question is, if your new currency would be attractive to potential users in the first place. I doubt that. It is burdened with restrictions and surveillance measures that scares off any freely thinking individual. The only class of people that I can imagine being supportive of it are those who support a socialist dictatorship.
ya.ya.yo!
August 21, 2016, 05:02:03 AM
I would suggest KYC verification if you desperately want to distribute your currency equally. Using IPs restriction is a joke, you can even try referral system (it works well) but still there are loopholes in it.
KYC is not full proof but it can reduce the chances of system manipulation and thus it’s good if you have time or staff for manual verification. I am not sure but you can reduce the chances of spammers spoiling your system by minimum 50%.
KYC is not full proof but it can reduce the chances of system manipulation and thus it’s good if you have time or staff for manual verification. I am not sure but you can reduce the chances of spammers spoiling your system by minimum 50%.
August 21, 2016, 04:15:42 AM
Hello!
A few of us have been working on a new cryptocurrency for a couple of years now, and we are getting ready to launch something within the next couple weeks. Figured I should probably run this by some economists regarding some of the rules of the currency.
We've managed to find a way to generate very high accuracy IDs, and would like to evenly distribute the currency across all the IDs to start it off, I want to make sure this is done in an economically sound way.
Here's what I'm thinking:
* 1 coin per day per person for the first 2000 days, meaning this is essentially vested to people over 5.5 years.
* 2% inflation per year and equally distribute that amongst all current accounts. This means that yes, we have inflation BUT it is being given to everyone who owns an account, so it encourages spending money but doesn't devalue the average account.
* Some incentives such as a referral program that allows earning 50 coins per day for referring new users, this money is also vested over time
We are also theoretically thinking about restricting some of the coin that is initially freely earned so that it can only be spent at approved stores, until it has been spent, sold on the market via some sort of BitPay like system, then rebought. Any coins other than those freely given out can be spent as wanted, this includes referral fees. We hope this should limit people dumping and encourage use as an actual currency. Because people will be allowed to sell some of their currency on the open market, we can still establish a price to start off this system. Or would the extreme volume we could get from people dumping their free coins be a great way to kickstart the currency with real volume?
Because we can track the number of unique currency holders as well as number of stores and volume and what not with more accuracy, we are thinking that we can also come up with a formula that gives the currency a "suggested value". Help here would be appreciated. Hopefully this remains a little more stable, because any time there is a bubble, new accounts will join which will introduce some more currency that could be sold and exert downward pressure into the system.
Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking about this but advice from an economist would be much appreciated! For example, should we frontload the distribution, so people can access most of their currency earlier? Little bit more BTC like with extreme initial inflation but lesser later inflation. I'm thinking evenly vesting should long term lead to people having more incentive to stick around.
Oh and yes.. we can decentralize this. Initially only a decentralized audit trail while we retain centralized control but we do plan to fully decentralize this once established. This is primarily because our ID system is more solid and hacker proof if we have many accounts. Additionally, decentralization is much more time consuming to implement and we want to test the market and make sure there is interest before spending that time.
Thoughts on any of this? Thank you!!
A few of us have been working on a new cryptocurrency for a couple of years now, and we are getting ready to launch something within the next couple weeks. Figured I should probably run this by some economists regarding some of the rules of the currency.
We've managed to find a way to generate very high accuracy IDs, and would like to evenly distribute the currency across all the IDs to start it off, I want to make sure this is done in an economically sound way.
Here's what I'm thinking:
* 1 coin per day per person for the first 2000 days, meaning this is essentially vested to people over 5.5 years.
* 2% inflation per year and equally distribute that amongst all current accounts. This means that yes, we have inflation BUT it is being given to everyone who owns an account, so it encourages spending money but doesn't devalue the average account.
* Some incentives such as a referral program that allows earning 50 coins per day for referring new users, this money is also vested over time
We are also theoretically thinking about restricting some of the coin that is initially freely earned so that it can only be spent at approved stores, until it has been spent, sold on the market via some sort of BitPay like system, then rebought. Any coins other than those freely given out can be spent as wanted, this includes referral fees. We hope this should limit people dumping and encourage use as an actual currency. Because people will be allowed to sell some of their currency on the open market, we can still establish a price to start off this system. Or would the extreme volume we could get from people dumping their free coins be a great way to kickstart the currency with real volume?
Because we can track the number of unique currency holders as well as number of stores and volume and what not with more accuracy, we are thinking that we can also come up with a formula that gives the currency a "suggested value". Help here would be appreciated. Hopefully this remains a little more stable, because any time there is a bubble, new accounts will join which will introduce some more currency that could be sold and exert downward pressure into the system.
Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking about this but advice from an economist would be much appreciated! For example, should we frontload the distribution, so people can access most of their currency earlier? Little bit more BTC like with extreme initial inflation but lesser later inflation. I'm thinking evenly vesting should long term lead to people having more incentive to stick around.
Oh and yes.. we can decentralize this. Initially only a decentralized audit trail while we retain centralized control but we do plan to fully decentralize this once established. This is primarily because our ID system is more solid and hacker proof if we have many accounts. Additionally, decentralization is much more time consuming to implement and we want to test the market and make sure there is interest before spending that time.
Thoughts on any of this? Thank you!!
As i read your solution, your idea is good but there are some exploitable aspect in there and some even conflict these even distribution. About mining some coin per person, you know this will be impossible, if you base it with IP address, it will be easily bypass, if you use the machine mac number the same thing . And the worst is the referral system and that 50 coin per referral will greatly affect the distribution. there is a better way than referral program.
August 18, 2016, 10:48:15 AM
Hello!
A few of us have been working on a new cryptocurrency for a couple of years now, and we are getting ready to launch something within the next couple weeks. Figured I should probably run this by some economists regarding some of the rules of the currency.
We've managed to find a way to generate very high accuracy IDs, and would like to evenly distribute the currency across all the IDs to start it off, I want to make sure this is done in an economically sound way.
Here's what I'm thinking:
* 1 coin per day per person for the first 2000 days, meaning this is essentially vested to people over 5.5 years.
* 2% inflation per year and equally distribute that amongst all current accounts. This means that yes, we have inflation BUT it is being given to everyone who owns an account, so it encourages spending money but doesn't devalue the average account.
* Some incentives such as a referral program that allows earning 50 coins per day for referring new users, this money is also vested over time
We are also theoretically thinking about restricting some of the coin that is initially freely earned so that it can only be spent at approved stores, until it has been spent, sold on the market via some sort of BitPay like system, then rebought. Any coins other than those freely given out can be spent as wanted, this includes referral fees. We hope this should limit people dumping and encourage use as an actual currency. Because people will be allowed to sell some of their currency on the open market, we can still establish a price to start off this system. Or would the extreme volume we could get from people dumping their free coins be a great way to kickstart the currency with real volume?
Because we can track the number of unique currency holders as well as number of stores and volume and what not with more accuracy, we are thinking that we can also come up with a formula that gives the currency a "suggested value". Help here would be appreciated. Hopefully this remains a little more stable, because any time there is a bubble, new accounts will join which will introduce some more currency that could be sold and exert downward pressure into the system.
Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking about this but advice from an economist would be much appreciated! For example, should we frontload the distribution, so people can access most of their currency earlier? Little bit more BTC like with extreme initial inflation but lesser later inflation. I'm thinking evenly vesting should long term lead to people having more incentive to stick around.
Oh and yes.. we can decentralize this. Initially only a decentralized audit trail while we retain centralized control but we do plan to fully decentralize this once established. This is primarily because our ID system is more solid and hacker proof if we have many accounts. Additionally, decentralization is much more time consuming to implement and we want to test the market and make sure there is interest before spending that time.
Thoughts on any of this? Thank you!!
A few of us have been working on a new cryptocurrency for a couple of years now, and we are getting ready to launch something within the next couple weeks. Figured I should probably run this by some economists regarding some of the rules of the currency.
We've managed to find a way to generate very high accuracy IDs, and would like to evenly distribute the currency across all the IDs to start it off, I want to make sure this is done in an economically sound way.
Here's what I'm thinking:
* 1 coin per day per person for the first 2000 days, meaning this is essentially vested to people over 5.5 years.
* 2% inflation per year and equally distribute that amongst all current accounts. This means that yes, we have inflation BUT it is being given to everyone who owns an account, so it encourages spending money but doesn't devalue the average account.
* Some incentives such as a referral program that allows earning 50 coins per day for referring new users, this money is also vested over time
We are also theoretically thinking about restricting some of the coin that is initially freely earned so that it can only be spent at approved stores, until it has been spent, sold on the market via some sort of BitPay like system, then rebought. Any coins other than those freely given out can be spent as wanted, this includes referral fees. We hope this should limit people dumping and encourage use as an actual currency. Because people will be allowed to sell some of their currency on the open market, we can still establish a price to start off this system. Or would the extreme volume we could get from people dumping their free coins be a great way to kickstart the currency with real volume?
Because we can track the number of unique currency holders as well as number of stores and volume and what not with more accuracy, we are thinking that we can also come up with a formula that gives the currency a "suggested value". Help here would be appreciated. Hopefully this remains a little more stable, because any time there is a bubble, new accounts will join which will introduce some more currency that could be sold and exert downward pressure into the system.
Anyway, I have spent a lot of time thinking about this but advice from an economist would be much appreciated! For example, should we frontload the distribution, so people can access most of their currency earlier? Little bit more BTC like with extreme initial inflation but lesser later inflation. I'm thinking evenly vesting should long term lead to people having more incentive to stick around.
Oh and yes.. we can decentralize this. Initially only a decentralized audit trail while we retain centralized control but we do plan to fully decentralize this once established. This is primarily because our ID system is more solid and hacker proof if we have many accounts. Additionally, decentralization is much more time consuming to implement and we want to test the market and make sure there is interest before spending that time.
Thoughts on any of this? Thank you!!
Jump to: