@toknormal.
1. What do you think about the yearly -7% miner reduction scheme? Bitcoin uses a halving (-50%) scheme every 4 years and there seems to be a general consensus that it creates strong upwards pressure on the price. Some time after the halving, price seems to strongly push higher. It almost confirms that the pure PoW mining model pushes price higher...
I think if we stick to a core principle, this question gets answered quite easily. That core principle is that:
• Dash needs to be as LIKE bitcoin as humanly in store of value and
• as DIFFERENT from bitcoin as humanly possible for utility
Therefore Dash needs to mine the sh* out of as much of its supply as possible to make it extremely scarce because that's what bitcoin does. At the same time Dash needs to leave just enough blockchain budget to fund its service layer - a dimension of utility that bitcoin does not have.
The smoother 7% reduction is therefore far more suited to that priority than the disruptive halving IMO because it makes masternode adoption less disruptive and allows investors a more predictable ROI.
2. How would you feel if Dash reduces the capital requirement for setting up a masternode, in the absence of protocol level shared masternodes? Clearly, this forms a high barrier to enter our service provisioning market (masternode network) and not everyone wants to use 3rd party shared masternode services (they should only do that if they are willing to take on the risk). Would you agree that reducing the capital requirement for masternodes should lead to an increased influx of investment?
I would not agree with that.
The masternode collateral level should remain high IMO, otherwise we'd just end up as a proof of stake coin which would be disastrous.
Masternode "sharing" should occur in the fintech commercial sector IMO, not at the blockchain protocol level, nor by trying to reduce the collateral to ever smaller amounts. By keeping the collateral threshold high we create a clear market in the fintech sector for security type products that are Dash backed. I've always argued that we should not think of a masternode as a "person". That only happened because when the price was low, a masternode and an individual human were largely synonymous. But the masternode is actually an archetype of the protocol and should remain so. It is not a "person". Nor is the masternode vote a "person". We need the idea of a masternode to stay with the protocol but the idea of its ownership to be able to float. Keeping the collateral high forces that decoupling at an earlier stage. It was already starting to happen during the last round of revaluation when we started seeing institutionalised investement coming in to the masternode sector.
But we're not going to see that again unless we address the reward ratio so that ROI in Dash can be replaced (mostly) with capital gain ROI. That's why it's important IMO to get Spork 21 reversed ASAP and restore mining across the majority of our blocks to protect their scarcity.
3. What do you think about the previously discussed idea to move the decimal backwards which would lower price per coin with a factor 100 for example? So if 1 Dash equals $100, it would become 100 Dash equals $100 or 1 Dash equals $1. It is not my personal preference, but during the 2017 pump to +$1500 it became quite clear that it provides a psychological barrier for potential investors who really want to own full units and simply don't understand the relation of our price with our extremely scarce supply.
Firstly, our supply isn't "scarce" unless it's made scarce through mining. Currently we give it away for free in cornflakes packets to masternodes in exchange for providing a service which bitcoin & litecoin get for free. (Dash would still retain all of its functional advantages even if all it did was make masternodes profitable to run over bitcoin nodes).
Re. the decimal point moving, that is another desperation move by people who don't understand where our store-of-value function is. Our store of value dimension comes form mining, not from either:
• trying to manage traffic to order books or from
• moving the decimal point on our denomination
To test the irrelevance of the "moving the decimal point" theory, follow these steps:
1. Go to
https://coinmarketcap.com/2. Click "Filters"
3. Click "Mineable"
4. Click "Circulating supply" to reverse sort
You should now be seeing the most valuable coins at the top if the theory holds.