Quote from: scam confirmed on July 02, 2015, 12:07:57 PM

Quote from: LOrrav on July 02, 2015, 11:55:27 AM

Quote from: scam confirmed on July 02, 2015, 09:47:25 AM

Stake modifier, omission of coin age in combination with NoKoin's initial 100% p.a. reward is an insolent rich-get-richer-poor-get-poorer-scheme!

Small NoKoin holders do not mint 24/7. Coin age doesn't linearly accumulate over time. --> Rich NoKoiners receive much more because they stake more often + due to compounded interest.

Rich foundations, rich founders, rich angel investors --> probably a feature.

Compound interest is necessary in order to prevent miners from staying offline most of the time:

http://forum.neucoin.org/t/technical-questions-and-clarifications/531/51

Agreed. But 100% isn't necessary. It's an insolent rich-get-richer-poor-get-poorer-scheme!

Disagree. We REALLY need Kourosh to explain the different reward rates more clearly (for large and small holders) and the outcome of this.
(I agree with the theory, not the practice)
Consider a small holder (30,000nokoin) wanting to stake once a year, instead of running his node 24/7.
Firstly he will have to not move/use his coin in that time period to keep his days idle, then he will attempt to stake?
Now he will have to keep trying for an unknown time also?

He will not be able to just turn on his laptop and mint the next block?
If he would mint on average once a month, then it will still, on average, take a month?
If he is lucky it will be sooner, if unlucky longer.

So the small holder is still contributing to security, albeit less than continuously contributing.
So 12 small holders doing this will contribute as much to security as foundations running 1 node?
(even though foundations hold 10000x more coin of those 12 small holders?)
Is this correct?

We also need an idea of the "growth account" costs and lock up period.
James thinks it will be free, baby mod hopes it will cost less than the reward!

BTW, still no answer if stake modifier was the innovation?