Topic: What is the 'fairest' way to distribute a currency? - page 2. (Read 2450 times)

Something issued to everybody is not fair in the long run, this is called an air drop and the end result is all the money flows to a few swindlers.   When you make something near worthless - people will give it up within a heart beat and this what results to concentration in an air drop.

 Eastern Europe had an air drop in the 1990s called the privitization vouchers (which the masses traded up for vodka and snickers - true story) and the end result was that a few Oligarchs got immensely wealthy at the expense of everybody else.   Digital currencies saw their own version of an air drop called Aurora and the country coins and people lost fortunes and a few people got rich overnight.



PoW is never fair because it has technological, technical and $capital requirements.   PoW is essentially a private IPO which in almost every coin results in whales due to instamining.


The fairest distribution in crypto history has been NEM.  True 7 billion people missed out on it (giving coins to that many is an air drop, see above).   The difference about NEM is that in a distribution of that scale there is no nepotism or cronyism - any stranger that was active in January-February of 2014 had a good shot of getting in as it was widely publicized at the time and the buy in cost was superficial.  I don't know any of the NEM developers on a first name basis or anything of that sort, but yet me (as a stranger) was able to get in.  This is compared to the typical alternate which has a distribution under 50 and you have to wonder how many of them are connected to the developers (friends?  relatives?  acquaintances?).

Was NEM 'fair' to people who missed the distribution period?  Well it is more like "inconvenienced" than 'unfair'.  That being said, NEM's distribution was not intended to be a planetary relief scheme but to prevent whales that we see in virtually 99% of alternates (whale to me is something who controls at least 2% of a coin or more).

Mining but with stagger block rewards starting at 0 and going to the eventual actual block reward then going back down over time is probably the fairest. Good examples would be WDC and DGC if you look at their charts its a nice smooth line over time. Both could be improved upon.

Almost forgot and a good lead time up to the announcement with wallet readily available from multiple locations.

Define 'fair'?

Some of these IPO currencies have received a lot of grief over it being unfair the way they were distributed.

Why is mining any more fair when early adopters can mine a lot more than later adopters? (very similar to an IPO.. except later adopters have to purchase the currency for higher rates)

So, what do you think is the most fair way to distribute a currency.. not necessarily run it but initially distribute it.