I fully acknowledge that all of my previous presented graphics indeed show a decentralised state of the cryptocurrency named Dash.
I also acknowledge that this will never be accepted by certain competing cryptocurrencies, who will try their best to devalue this decentralised state of Dash. Unfortunetely for them they
will need to try a little bit harder as it is not really working for them.
You did not even answer his critique as he made a solid argument. He got a point.... bringing up the competition only weakens your point further. "Dont listen to what they tell, because they come from Monero and are only jealous and i dont need to answer that".
Lets face it if i were to counterpost every post that trolls make in this thread, i would be having no free time at all. Besides his points were kinda pointless anyways or to put it in his words : his points have major weaknesses ..
* Paid nodes that can be bought and sold mumbo jumbo.
Masternodes are servers that can be rented (some $5 per month) or run from your home. The 1000 Dash is just collateral thats sitting on some cold wallet under your own control.
You are not buying or selling paid nodes, you are buying or selling Dash tokens, it really is that simple and has nothing to do with centralisation or with selling or buying paid nodes.
* The second flaw in design is that they collect fees, which means node holders collect money that in turn can be used to buy more nodes that in turn can collect more fees, and so on and so forth.
The major flaw is thinking this is a major flaw while in fact it is strenghtening the Dash network and is a keyfactor why the masternode network is growing so fast and why it will continue to grow years to come.
Rewarding masternodes for services they provide to the network (mixing, instantx, network security) is just good economics and will make Dash a much stronger full nodes network over time.
Again this has nothing to do with centralisation currently as enough party's have been buying and selling Dash on the open market over these last years and the block rewards are scheduled to deminish over time anyways, making it even more decentralised over time.
Honestly it sometime feels like i'm listening to parrots who accidentally picked up some words (instamine & centralised) and just keep repeating them over and over without understanding their meaning.
You're paying to control a node, a node which rewards you with voting power and the resources to buy more nodes. It saddens me that you can't see how this creates centralization, but niggling over the semantics of paynodes versus collateralnodes wont change the fact that it creates centralization. Sometimes, when dealing with dashers who play semantical games, I feel like I'm talking to my four year old nephew who corrects me when I call R2D2 a robot, "no, it's a droid." My retort, "Well, kid, sorry to tell you that your nomenclature doesn't invalidate standard English, and by that measure, all robots are droids--so Qwizno, you are PAYING to control a node, therefore when I write paynode, I mean you are paying to control a node--dashisms don't trump the English language, nor will semantical cat and mouse games hide the fact that your chosen currency-developers cannot verify its distribution, but your chosen design and blockchain CAN verify that it creates an easy path to centralization and created 2 million coins in two days, which further exasperates the design failure (when I say design failure, I mean if you were trying to create a decentralized coin as advertised and used this design, you would create the opportunity for the exact opposite effect).