Quote from: eduffield on November 06, 2014, 08:16:10 PM

Quote from: oblox on November 06, 2014, 08:07:31 PM

Quote from: eduffield on November 06, 2014, 08:02:51 PM

Quote from: eahmadov on November 06, 2014, 07:37:00 PM

Quote from: eduffield on November 06, 2014, 07:29:54 PM

ShadowCash Proposal Conditions

1.) Converted funds will be locked for a period of 90 days
2.) We're looking for some kind of commitment from the core team that they'd work on darkcoin for at least a year beyond this. They could work on whatever they like, at the pace they're working now.
3.) DRK Will be paid for in a 1:1 relationship, dollar wise from this moment forward. 494909 (SDC MarketCap) / 9833182 (DRK Market Cap), therefore 5.03% of the total number of DRK coins will be created on a future block, totaling 240277DRK. The exchange rate will be 31.33SDC for 1DRK.
4.) SDC users will be awarded DRK based on coins destroyed and signed (sign the private key proving you own the key). A user will send coins to a non-redeemable address, if those coins for example equal 1% (64435 SDC) of the total number of SDC ( that would amount to 2056DRK being awarded.

Evan, I had no idea you were considering "printing" more Darkcoins to bail out ShadowCash. There should be a better solution. This will create a bad precedent and what will stop you not 'print' more money in the future? Ok, I get it, we need new dev team but we don't have to bail out a failing coin. Let's think about an alternative plan.

I don't think "printing" is a good analogy to what we're doing. It's more like moving their marketcap in ours, remember they're destroying coins to create them in Darkcoin. Besides that, we've talked about reducing the eventual coin supply to compensate for the new coins, so there's actually no inflationary effect in the long term. I'll add this to the document.

Also, we're not acting unilaterally. There was an idea that has been proposed to their team and will only be done with the consent of the community.

Be that as it may, you are altering the reward structure by being able to print a superblock to increase the coin supply. It goes against what crypto stands for. The decision to change the reward in terms of balance between miners and masternodes didn't change the max coinage--it was still the same block reward, but split differently. What you're talking about is actually changing the amount of outstanding coins... please tell me you see that.

What happens 6 months from now when another opportunity arises, are we just going to print another superblock to merge with them? Where do you draw the line?

From the proposal: "In the long term, Darkcoins distribution curve will be slightly reduced so we release exactly the same amount of coins in the long term. This will also counteract the effects of expanding the Darkcoin supply." In the long term this is a non-inflationary event.

This is the only "coin-merge" that's being planned.

I think a lot of people, including myself were anticipating the max coinage being closer to that 16-17M range from the blocks being driven down to the floor reward level...