Thankyou for taking the time to write that most excellently articulated and instructive account of the protocol policy. Very useful.

I can see the logic behind it given certain assumptions, but it's those assumptions that I feel are the Achilles heel of it all. In particular the delineation of "circulating supply". I see this as arbitrary because masternode collateral is "circulating supply" just as non-masternode cold wallet supply is. Masternodes change hands and get churned and are tradeable assets just as any other part of the supply is.

I don't think supply growth is the problem - or at least not the fundamental one. We've got it whatever the level of nodecount there is and node collateral only mitages this while it is growing. As soon as it stops growing we've got the problem again. It's this equilibriium condition that should be addressed and that's where the margin parity approach would be much more successful because it optimally minimises the gross fiat budget we require to collect from markets to sustain the coin.