Quote from: smooth on August 17, 2014, 04:06:28 AM

Quote from: crypto_zoidberg on August 16, 2014, 11:01:06 PM

I guess in global view, comapred to XMR we have more honest distribution, at least because we have more fair emission curve:

I'm not sure why one curve would be any more fair than the other.

Does XCN have a more fair emission curve because it has a 10-year half life? Would 20-years be even better?

To me "fair" means that the rules are clearly defined and those same rules apply to everyone.

Different emissions curves might have practical advantages and disadvantages, but fairness is not among them.

Disagree somehwat, there will be nuances over the way people intepret words like 'fair', but I think it can certainly apply to emission curve. Seems to me that the steeper the curve the smaller the pool of potential participants. Especially when this is a project in very much alpha status. I can't imagine bitcoin would of enjoyed quite the same success it had, if the vast majority of the rewards were already doled out from 2009-2011.

~50% of all XMR that will ever be in existence will be minted near 1 year from now which limits large pool of xmr holders to confines of the specific monero thread(s), in a subsection of this forum, subreddits and a few guys who heard about it trollbox of obscure exchanges. Imagine if that same emission curve was even steeper, and instead 50% of the supply will be released in 1 month.. how about 1 week, or 1 hour..let's be even more retarded and say 1 minute. Half of all monero ever released in 1 minute; BUT the rules were clearly defined.. the [ann] thread was created explaining everything prior to the launch. (even though it may have done a half-assed attempt at a launch before subsequently picked up and saved/taken over/relaunched/rebranded months later..which incidentally is a great cover for a little headstart)

Would you consider that fair? If you are fixed in this opinion curves themselves can't be fair or unfair- they don't have emotion or greed since they are some mathematical property, an algorithmic function who's nature is clearly defined--

then would you consider the designer/implementer (and the guys who said- let's roll with it) unfair?-
being that they were the ones in a good position to profit proportionally corresponding to how 'unfair' as it was?

But.. in the same breath I agree you can't really eliminate the chance of early adopters getting rich by stretching things out. It's the nature of these things. And ultimately the market will decide the fate. If market believes it's got a value they will buy. regardless of whether it was mined in an hour,a day, a century or whatever