Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1387. (Read 4671936 times)

Agreed on emission ideally following adoption, but not agreed that it should be changed to match it.
The fact that your exact argument could be made in 6 months again if a changed was applied now, strongly undermines its relevance.

And no, saying "we sear it will only happen once" is not going to give holders back the confidence they'd be losing.

Saying "retarded" does not help anything.

Tail-end aside, the emission curve is what it is.  The market has already priced XMR accordingly and it's not going to change.

You have to accept the volatility and occasional pumps/dumps.  It's economically impossible for something to only go up and never down.

Two steps forward one step back Fibonacci retrenchment/fortification is the healthiest way to grow with true strength.

A 25% devtax on mining is politically impossible and guaranteed to result in a fork.

The devs will never agree to change Monero as a result of, or in attempt to manipulate, transient market conditions.  That's why we love it!

I have no patience for reading the complete thread of 775 pages (and also my time is limited).
However, when it comes to emission curve, ideally it should go along with adoption.
When adoption is 5 times, also the emission should be 5 times.

What we see now is the lack of capability of absorbing the coins (the price is declining slowly).
Price is the best indicator wether the emission is ideal or not - and it is retarded to maintain something that is not ideal just because it is "holy and unquestionable like the Pope". When they decided the emission rate earlier in the voting, the decision was made on based on the best knowledge of that time - however now we are in September and over 20 % of coins mined, now it is the moment of truth: is the current emission rate ideal for status quo?
Do we have adoption enough to maintain the price (or prefertably even increasing it slowly so that the investors will continue being interested in buying the coins - personally I am not buyer at this moment - I am not dumper neither but I have a stack that I am satisfied and I do not see any reason to increase it especially if there is no incentive for such).
I am dumper if the price starts drastically decline from the current and when I dump, I most likely will never touch the coin anymore.

Ideally the coin should serve all the stakeholders: miners, developers, investors.
The "ever increasing price trend" serves all these stakeholder groups, miners get more money from their mined coins, developers get more donations/their stack grows in value and investors get their annual rate of return.

The blockreward should be dimished or make a stash from each block, for example 25 % of each block rewards goes to the escrowed fund that finances the development and pays after something has achieved according to the burden.
The other way is simply to lengthen the emission curve, it can be done wether making a block to appear every 3 minutes instead of every 1 minute or it can be adjusted by decreasing the block reward for example 33 % the latter will give more time for development and is more gracious towards adoption, it means the later adopters get also relatively long not too expensive coins.

The lowering of blockreward is not bad for later adopters IMO as long as the total coin supply stays constant, it just gives more time for people to join in to the party.


My 0.02 XMR. Peace.

Thanks, I'm glad you like the idea.

Politics and BCX's forced evolution supervillain antics aside, the main technical obstacle preventing bootstrap is lack of a final emission schedule.

Once we decide on tail-end emissions, 1% or 2% of total coin supply can be moved into the Bootstrap Block, and then auctioned.

http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/trolls-just-want-to-have-fun.pdf

seems it is to me.  bcx is gonna redeem our popcorn show afterall.

I am harping on a broken chord maybe...... Kindly induge me once more. Of all the ideas floating around, one that may find least resistance is one which devs keep getting a portion of of mining blocks.... Smooth and fluffypony have underscored the problems with regards to this..... But can the emission size and spacing between them be moderated so as to address those problems?

Is moneropool.com down?

Atrides is saying that Mintpal isn't working correctly, that's probably why. Try contacting their support to see if they can help you out.

The main body of XMR emission is set in stone and not going to change.

The tail-end emission has yet to be determined.

Did you check if transaction is in the blockchain?

For that I need API on nodes with wallets, but I don't think exchanges open such sensitive information.

But if they will use my scripts to send data, it will work.
I'll write this suggestion to exchanges.

BTW, Mintpal works now.

A security issue that may affect crypto-currency users on Linux or Macs: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2heu88/if_you_are_storing_bitcoins_on_a_linuxmac_system/

Haha, no way. What you're describing is the Voldemort case of any respectable crypto. I shan't even paraphrase it to a more understandable form

Atrides: Could you perhaps add exchange monitoring to forkguard? 
Cheers!

Bter and Bittrex disabled deposits.
Mintpal opened, but doesn't work.
Only Poloniex and Hitbtc accept coins.

Hi,
I sent 10 XMR to bittrex at 23 09 2014. Now xmr wallet at bitrex is offline (dev requested).I use 3 as mix parameter,,but I still don't  receive any XMR coins. Is 2 days  normal time for transaction?
May be I have to contact bittrex for more information?

It is our pleasure to announce that the MEW is officially opened. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/monero-economy-workgroup-the-mew-thread-776479
Please read the OP, we updated it compared the original one.

This is only true if there is a discontinuity in the emission.  If instead, there were a redenomination of the extant emission, the damage to adoption would not be an issue.
Current holders would be sacrificing some small present value in favor of anticipated future gains due to enhanced adoption.