Topic: New Cryptographic Currency - page 6. (Read 4457 times)

simplicity is the essence of brand identity.

doesnt seem to improve in exiting tech or new ideas but worth a shot.. Go with the FLOW, try to avoid FOMO

For sure, I slapped that logo up in 5 minutes . Just a rough initial draft of an idea in my mind.

Also, I want to hear ideas and input, maybe the graphic and name might spark some inspiration.

The logo seems a tad bit too simple in my opinion and it lacks creativity (sorry if it sounds insulting). Let's not brand it yet, why not take some more input form the community, give it a little more time maybe you'll come up with other ideas.

People around here tend to start branding coins too early.

Name Idea: Flow(FLW)

Icon/Logo Idea: http://i.imgur.com/ECuqPa8.png

Same logo as my GitHub: https://github.com/fl0wd3v

EDIT: This is just an idea I am throwing out there and I am more than willing to hear suggestions and see other logo options as well as names.

I was looking at varied algorithms which are CPU based, but that was based upon a Bitcoin progression path.

It can stay as x11, but personally, I like the look of SHA3, Argon2d and a few others.

Which algorithms would you say are a good option?

EDIT: The mining algorithm chosen also depends on the progression path we want in terms of mining hardware.

Ofcourse, i totally forgot that private keys are unlocked while staking, my apologize, and i am a massive fan of maximum privacy, i really think this layout is incredible with a very well designed total supply.

And will this be done off x11? Or will that be changed around iswell.

I am not personally a fan of PoS as this requires inputs to be unlocked the whole time whilst staking, which exposes the private keys, also, securing the Masternodes with PoS hashes is very much a bad idea. I think the reward structure I have laid out secures ROI and secures both miners and Masternode operators at different stages throughtout the lifecycle of coin production(~35 years).

Hi, very interested, also what would be your take on general staking? Would you run this as ONLY PoW and masternodes or will you have general wallet staking implemented? From what i have read i presume that you have decided that it would only be masternode staking. Do you believe that the future of the coin could be jeopardized by a " only pow/masternode setup" were only early adopters or wealthy investers would remain the majority?

I wanted to put this out there, instead of just plonking up an OP for another new coin.

I am an experienced developer, love for crypto and thinking about launching a coin. I want it to be as fair as possible with input and help from the community(I am one person). I have some numbers drawn up for rewards which I believe to be steady and fair for people involved in the coin.

I want to develop this for a period of 2 years minimum with the hope that people in the community will help in terms of support, development, marketing and promotion and simple suggestions.

Too many coins have a corporate image and are no longer for the people, let's change that.

My Skills: Programming/Graphic Design/Web Design/B2B Sales
My Age: Mid 30's
My Location: Europe

Here are my initial numbers for rewards based on a 128 second block time:

http://i.imgur.com/7Dh2u4w.png <--- Same info as below but an image from Excel with graphs etc.

Year	Blocks	Reward		Production			Cumulative	Inflation				Masternode
		PoW	Masternode	PoW	Masternode	Total		PoW	Masternode	Total		nCount @10%,ROI
												500
												10%
0	-					475,000	475,000	N/A	N/A	N/A
1	246,544	10	1	2,465,438	246,544	2,711,981	3,186,981	519.0%	51.9%	570.9%		4,931
2	493,088	10	1	2,465,438	246,544	2,711,981	5,898,963	77.4%	7.7%	85.1%		4,931
3	739,631	9	2	2,218,894	493,088	2,711,981	8,610,944	37.6%	8.4%	46.0%		9,862
4	986,175	9	2	2,218,894	493,088	2,711,981	11,322,925	25.8%	5.7%	31.5%		9,862
5	1,232,719	8	3	1,972,350	739,631	2,711,981	14,034,906	17.4%	6.5%	24.0%		14,793
6	1,479,263	8	3	1,972,350	739,631	2,711,981	16,746,888	14.1%	5.3%	19.3%		14,793
7	1,725,806	7	4	1,725,806	986,175	2,711,981	19,458,869	10.3%	5.9%	16.2%		19,724
8	1,972,350	7	4	1,725,806	986,175	2,711,981	22,170,850	8.9%	5.1%	13.9%		19,724
9	2,218,894	6	5	1,479,263	1,232,719	2,711,981	24,882,831	6.7%	5.6%	12.2%		24,654
10	2,465,438	6	5	1,479,263	1,232,719	2,711,981	27,594,813	5.9%	5.0%	10.9%		24,654
11	2,711,981	5	6	1,232,719	1,479,263	2,711,981	30,306,794	4.5%	5.4%	9.8%		29,585
12	2,958,525	5	6	1,232,719	1,479,263	2,711,981	33,018,775	4.1%	4.9%	8.9%		29,585
13	3,205,069	4	7	986,175	1,725,806	2,711,981	35,730,756	3.0%	5.2%	8.2%		34,516
14	3,451,613	4	7	986,175	1,725,806	2,711,981	38,442,738	2.8%	4.8%	7.6%		34,516
15	3,698,156	3	8	739,631	1,972,350	2,711,981	41,154,719	1.9%	5.1%	7.1%		39,447
16	3,944,700	3	8	739,631	1,972,350	2,711,981	43,866,700	1.8%	4.8%	6.6%		39,447
17	4,191,244	2	9	493,088	2,218,894	2,711,981	46,578,681	1.1%	5.1%	6.2%		44,378
18	4,437,788	2	9	493,088	2,218,894	2,711,981	49,290,663	1.1%	4.8%	5.8%		44,378
19	4,684,331	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	52,002,644	0.5%	5.0%	5.5%		49,309
20	4,930,875	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	54,714,625	0.5%	4.7%	5.2%		49,309
21	5,177,419	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	57,426,606	0.5%	4.5%	5.0%		49,309
22	5,423,963	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	60,138,588	0.4%	4.3%	4.7%		49,309
23	5,670,506	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	62,850,569	0.4%	4.1%	4.5%		49,309
24	5,917,050	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	65,562,550	0.4%	3.9%	4.3%		49,309
25	6,163,594	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	68,274,531	0.4%	3.8%	4.1%		49,309
26	6,410,138	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	70,986,513	0.4%	3.6%	4.0%		49,309
27	6,656,681	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	73,698,494	0.3%	3.5%	3.8%		49,309
28	6,903,225	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	76,410,475	0.3%	3.3%	3.7%		49,309
29	7,149,769	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	79,122,456	0.3%	3.2%	3.5%		49,309
30	7,396,313	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	81,834,438	0.3%	3.1%	3.4%		49,309
31	7,642,856	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	84,546,419	0.3%	3.0%	3.3%		49,309
32	7,889,400	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	87,258,400	0.3%	2.9%	3.2%		49,309
33	8,135,944	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	89,970,381	0.3%	2.8%	3.1%		49,309
34	8,382,488	1	10	246,544	2,465,438	2,711,981	92,682,363	0.3%	2.7%	3.0%		49,309
35	8,629,031	1	10	210,694	2,106,943	2,317,638	95,000,000	0.2%	2.3%	2.5%		42,139

This reward structure is based upon my belief that that there will be more miners than Masternodes to begin with and over time the incentive must switch to maintain ROI as the Masternode numbers increase.

I am thinking of forking Dash but removing the budgeting block and proposal system. I do not like the idea of someone with a lot of Masternodes manipulating the vote to attain the budgeting blocks. By removing the proposal/vote/budget system from Dash, we completely circumvent that issue.

CPU mineable? CPU/GPU mineable? Just GPU? Multi-Algo? - I am thinking CPU mining to start with and taking a mining progression path similar to Bitcoins, or do people disagree with the path of Bitcoin?

What are peoples thoughts overall?

EDIT: Oh and I based my numbers off of Masternode collateral costing 500.