Quote from: toknormal on November 23, 2020, 11:01:03 PM

Quote from: jdmcg on November 23, 2020, 10:28:05 PM

I think the benefits of trustless shared masternodes would outweigh the downside...All DASH locked in the savings account would be pooled together, allowing for individual terms to end at the same time as taking down the least amount of masternodes due to the reduction of pooled collateral. People who want to run masternodes but don't have the 1000 DASH, could subscribe to running one with a minimum of 200 DASH or so with the remaining 800 or so required counted from the savings pool of all locked DASH.

It sounds neat.

But the main problem is, nodes simply aren't a significant economic hub in crypto networks in the first place. They're not money-making commercial enterprises but rather a very cheap to maintain component of the network. So the issue of whether they're shared or not is irrelevant IMO compared with the viability of the reward they receive in the first place.

The use they have in Dash's case isn't as a revenue-earning business (at least not primarily) but to boost the capital value of the mined currency by decoupling its mining from the services layer and make it more attractive for payments use without any significant loss in mined value. A bit like how a steering wheel is an extremely cheap component of a motor car - maybe only $100 in a $20,000 vehicle - but without it the car's value would be nothing. You wouldn't be able to drive it.

All the same, pretending that the steering wheel should be valued at $20,000 as well would put the car's value at $40,000. So out of whack with any competitors that you wouldn't get any customers.

So it is with masternodes. They are an extremely cheap component that requires us to compromise very little in comparison to bitcoin to gain a huge advantage. If we pretend however that they are so expensive to run that it requires half the entire coin supply to support, then we'll lose all our customers. (As we have done). Whether they're shared or not is an irrelevance.

So no improvements until you get your 80/20 miner/masternode owner reward ratio?

Why not start a new project or fork then? I can't imagine there'd be more than 10% that support your position. And even those that might have considered it are tired of discussing something that has already been discussed to death and decided on. We can't keep changing our minds. Once a decision is made it should be given time to play out.

To me you have four productive choices, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive, although some are:

1) Continue gathering evidence for your position and quietly work on a comprehensive presentation that can be revealed in 2-3 years from now when people will be more receptive of it. Of course we'd expect that Dash has completely fallen out of competition among alts as you predicted and not rallied to new ATH's with the rest of the good alts this coming bull market as I've predicted.

2) Gather a team and all the support you can to either start a new coin from scratch or fork Dash with the ideal reward ratio you envision. Then we can see how it fairs.

3) Accept that you aren't able to garner enough support at this time but that Dash is a good enough alt that it should still do well enough for you in the upcoming years to hold your position

4) Sell all or some of your Dash and diversify into other projects. Polkadot and Cosmos for example will likely do rather well this next year.

Of course you can continue fighting like you are but it's likely only to give you heartburn.