if DASH REALLY is looking to optimize as a store of value, must be backed by proven store of values and OFF CHAIN...
This is not a cryptocurrency. It's a blockchain hosted security which is the worst of all worlds. A signed paper contract is far more secure for this type of asset.
Dash has the Dash Investment Foundation in which store of value assets CAN be purchased and held off chain. Dash would be backed by store of value assets completely separately of the token value.
This would be similar to how central banks hold gold 'off chain' (at least not directly linked to their fiat currencies). As far as I know Dash is unique among cryptocurrencies in this ability
I don't know how a dash fork would or could claim any joint ownership of the DIf assets. Probably would have to start from scratch and create its own investment foundation I'm guessing.
Obviusly, theres nothing to claim, they are two different proyects and matters.
Obviously, a fork should build its own Reserves. That is Duffield's huge contribution to crypto: The possibility of financing the project by snatching the excuse of monetary emissions from the miners (RTaylor wanted to amplify it by stimulating general interest funds, which are those that contribute to the general reinforcement of the project ... and the Mnodes only increased their share, condemning the vocation of decentralization and collective enrichment, as in the case of the marginalized Shared Mnodes contemplated by Duffield).
Elitist parasitism in DASH stems from a part of its structure, conceived to administer the project management and its rules ... and which has falsely derived its role towards an orgy of private profit). Duffield conceived DASH as an economic structure controlled by its members ... but did not pay attention to the possible corruption of one of its parts, which, by blocking the enormous decentralization that a legion of micro-holders would bring, hijacked the project and its spirit of synergy. collective, which was what gave it absolutely limitless projection of expansion and adoption as consensus money, which is what these retardeds underestimated, believing that DASH's wealth was raining from the sky.
Amputating that collective projection that Duffield understood perfectly, they cut off the head of that insurmountable approach. Now these idiots are looking for that tailwind in "technological excellence", "user usability", "sale of monopoly rights" - the famous "rich" of @xkcd - and other pathetic attempts ... that of course, they will never match the tremendous power of the original approach of the project, because DASH does not attract support or to forward a twit ... as is logical and normal.
It is the price of turning a collaborator with whom to share ... into a client with whom to enrich yourself ... who obviously will not contribute their money for such stupidity. On the charts against BTC you have the most explicit graphical representation of how crypto receives that "conceptual fallacy". Literally, ignoring it, even being a supposed "improved BTC" (the biggest improvement of DASH over BTC was already expressed before any technological optimization ... and it was that DASH was a BTC self-controlled by its followers and also, distributing dividends. Simple tean not be understood by the elite who hijacked DASH gives a perfect measure of their neural capacity.
People who long to win back the consensus money that the global elite has stolen from their citizens are not looking to feed new parasites ... even if they change their suits. (Yep yep ... those narcissistic morons who publicly declare that "The Mnodes are like the Fed" ... and then laugh at the "vileness of their occurrence").
What is snatched by them is the first thing to retrieve a fork of DASH.