Topic: Premine and a few big stakeholders can be good for a coin (Read 426 times)

NO WAY

Premine must have

Full ledger and block explorer enabling transparent wallet balances.

without this promises and giving out a fraction of a huge premine is a scam.

I say the problem is not premine, the problem is DUMP. Miners afraid that devs will dump a lot of coins on market and lower the price.

Consider, someone is making an official premine. 2%. 0.5% for giveaways, 0.5% for bounties and 1% for the dev. With "official" I mean it is announced, not a start without nodes or wallet in the right time. In addition to that, the dev promises not to sell his share for at least one year and shows the wallet address.

Would you invest or call it scam?

It is interesting.
1. Coins for giveaways. Giveaways are just another way of distribution of coins and simple promotion. Why not?
2. Bounties for building apps, explorer etc.? Again, this is just another way of disribution. Instead of contribution hashing power someone contributes programming skills and time.
3. Premine for devs. You can see that as an reward for the coding effort. But when there is not much effort? Well, see it as an insurance, that the dev has a high incentive to not fuck up the coin and to promote it, so it'll more likely gain in value. Because only in this way he can get rich. Pump and dump? No.

With #3 it is the same, with other stakeholders. When there are only many small holders of the coin, there is no clear incentive to promote the coin. Why should I? Therre are thousands of others. But when there are some big stakeholders, they have a real incentive to boost the coin.

So normally you think the exact opposite. When there is a premine and big stakeholders, the coin is in big trouble because the big holders can dump all the coins and destroy the price. But many small holders can dump at the same time, too. So there I don't really see a difference.

When is premine bad?
When it is inofficial = lack of transparancy! Not providing a source, wallet, nodes, so the dev can mine alone. Or just an announcement on a forum which nobody knows. Another point is an instamine. No, not when it is in the protocol like QUBIT (same model as Quark). It is not fair, when the difficulty starts at an ridiculous low level and adjusts only after a long time. So that you have 5times more coins after one hour than specified in the protocol(especially with a steep reward model, where you mine 3% of all coins at the first day, and so it becomes 15%). To an fair launch it is deeply required to make the reward for the first couple of hours near zero. Examples for a fair start: DigitalCoin or Qubitcoin

What do you say?