Seems interesting at first sight but can someone explain the decentralised block size voting?
Why would any miner other than an IPO holder vote for less than the maximum block size? Doing otherwise would be like me going to my boss and asking for a pay cut?
Thanks. Your question is highly relevant.
There actually seems to be quite a bit of disagreement over which way people are going to vote (see below). There has even been some concern that IPO stakeholders could try to suppress the money supply by intentionally voting for zero block reward; however, we think this would be extremely unlikely. Since we have touched on these questions earlier in this thread, I'm going to repost here for convenience.
#1All though interesting, I don't believe block reward voting to be useful as everyone regardless of large or small stake will vote for the lowest possible block reward to increase the value of any coins mined.
Increasing the coin supply does not increase the value. Likewise reducing the block reward increases the scarcity (value).
Why would anyone vote otherwise?
This is an interesting post, and I think it highlights why block reward voting is so interesting.
As you say, there is a really strong argument for miners with _any_ stake to vote for 0 block reward.
On the other hand, other users seem to think the opposite.
I think that the voting for reward thing isn't going to work as you think it will... I don't see any reason for a miner to vote for a lower reward.
As ymer says, there's still a huge incentive for miners to vote for the maximum reward. We think this is especially true for miners without a stake or with a small stakes.
Thus, already we have two users with two very different (actually opposing) ideas for how to vote.
We think that the way these forces play out will be very interesting and could give rise to some surprising results!
Am I missing something? With the variable block rewards, if the IPO investors all voted for a low number of coins it would keep the coin supply down and increase the value of the IPO holding?
Therefore the value of the original IPO would be much higher than suggested?
I guess what I am wondering is there a new paradigm of mining "low" to increase the value of your IPO? and if that is the case surely the IPO value must be higher that suggested?
Interesting idea. While it's theoretically possible for the supply of Heavycoin to be extremely rare (eg. minted extremely slowly due to aggressive zero-vote mining by IPO stakeholders), there will be other miners voting for a large (or maximum) block reward. So we don't think it will be that simple.
Yes. We think Heavycoin will bring a new dynamic/paradigm where some miners will have incentive to vote for a low (or zero) block reward. During the 3 phases of voting we think it's likely we will see different (perhaps unexpected) strategies adopted by miners. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. We don't know what to expect, as this has never been done before.
Regarding the value of the IPO pot, we have no idea. The free market will decide and we only hope for a good distribution. It already looks very good thanks to all the supporters on the forums.
