Quote from: StakeBox on March 31, 2016, 04:44:18 AM

Quote from: jk9694 on March 31, 2016, 03:48:55 AM

Quote from: s3v3nh4cks on March 31, 2016, 02:49:55 AM

As we work on the PoS implementation that is still a few months away, We have been discussing some potential numbers for the Reward values for the PoS phase. We wanted to get everyones opinions, good or bad.. In the end this is a Community Driven Coin and thats the way we want it.

So here are some possible numbers, keep in mind that these are not in concrete, and are to stimulate some discussion. after a few days of discussion, if there are not any major issues i will post it for formal vote.

If for some reason you are not in favor, please explain why you feel this way.

PoS Phase 1: (50 DNET per block) Blocks 259201 - 777600 [518400 blocks per year] 25,920,000 DNET

PoS Phase 2: (25 DNET per block) Blocks 777601 - 1296000 [518400 blocks per year] 12,960,000 DNET

PoS Phase 3: (5 DNET per block) Blocks 1296001- 1814400 [518400 blocks per year] 2,592,000 DNET

PoS Phase 4: (2.5 DNET per block) Blocks 1814401 + [518400 blocks per year] 1,296,000 per yr there after

let us know your feelings..

And what are you thinking for the masternode rewards?

The split between the masternodes and the staker would still be using the seesaw mechanism we had discussed before. The numbers for the split between stakers and masternodes are still being hashed out. Our intent is still to have masternodes be only slightly more profitable than staking on a per coin basis when the network is balanced properly between coins staking and locked up in masternodes. We are really just trying to see how everyone feels about the overall block rewards and coin production. Once we are switched over to PoS we can reduce inflation by lowering the rewards for each block. What we want to do is start a conversation about the pros and cons of such substantial rewards reductions.

Masternode only slightly more profitable than staking? I wouldn't feel incentivized to run a masternode if that was the case.

Fluctuations in price mean I could have accumulated more DNET this last month if I'd day-traded, as opposed to holding in a masternode. If I was just staking in wallet because masternode was only slightly more profitable, that's exactly what I would have done: traded and moved coins back & forth to wallet to stake, with less long term incentive to hold.

Setting up a masternode was a hassle, updating was a hassle, paying hosting invoices a hassle, not to mention the additional cost. I am not going to be doing this for a slight and negligible profit in an uncertain market.

One of the features of this coin is it currently has a strong network 700+ masternodes and growing. I see the strength of the network being a USP in the future. Lots of coins have lots of POS participants, lots of coins don't have a 1000, maybe 2000+ masternodes. It should be a priority to encourage and achieve this.