Full Time DASH Troll.

EPIC!!!

Argument by Gibberish - another example of fallacious reasoning.

There are plenty of holders of $83k worth of bitcoin who do so without requiring an "uneconomic profit" to be paid to them out of the blockchain. Nor would they want to if it came at the cost of devaluation of their capital. Dash has no advantage there from simply having coins held in wallets. Its advantage is in being as good a store of value as bitcoin but with an on-chain service layer.

But that service layer should be valued appropriately. If it isn't then the advantage is lost and we simply use the blockchain to pretend that "something is happening" which warrants payment to masternodes.

You are the one who is mis-representing Dash by pretending that capital costs alone represent a basis for masternode revenues and absolve them from generating any economic benefit for the chain. I can understand how masternodes themselves can be deluded by this logic (turkeys/christmas) but outside investors are not.

1) "...I cannot give you "anecdotal evidence" other than to say that if we keep doing what we're doing, we're likely to keep going where we're going which is now a 3-year near-permanent trajectory to the bottom of the mined marketcap rankings in terms of our early contemporaries."

2) "...evidence doesn't turn up in nice neat anecdotal packages where a specific traders say they didn't invest in Dash because they wanted to invest in coin, not masternode profits."

3) The theory is that Dash has only half the mining budget that our competitors do and therefore can store far less capital in its chain. The empirical evidence for that is that we've lost our lead and competitiveness in marketcap.

4) "The idea that the competitive deficit was for want of an additional 10% is ludicrous IMO -

5) " not least for the reasons that I presented previously that the market simply sets the reward ratio in dollar terms anyway."

Again...Hypothesis.  A "theory"

Hypothesis...

The selling wouldn't be any different, it's the capital flows that would be = what the blockchain reward was spent on.

This cult talk, not investment talk. Blind allegiance in place of critical appraisal. We're 6 years in. What's you're idea of "long term" ? Decades ?


Why is this such a big deal ? The project has lost so much competitivity already.

We are just above 1/5th of Litecoin's marketcap. One half of Monero's (after having been consistently 3x to 5x theirs). Even Ethereum's failed fork has attracted more relative value.

Maybe you should take a moment to reflect on that and demonstrate some humility when it comes to entertaining a re-appraisal of the core principles that we took for granted would make this asset more investible. Whittling away contrarians year after year isn't doing Dash any good.

The split-reward mechanism isn't working as intended when it comes to competitiveness in the investment market. Face it and start embracing some alternative views. Doesn't mean the principle's wrong, it's worked well in certain aspects such as funding DCG and boosting the technical performance of the network. But the economics of it are not well tuned and the huge masternode margins (in Dash terms) are easily characterised as wasteful from a casual outside investor's perspective. Also doesn't mean that the analyses I've presented are necessarily bullet proof or beyond criticism. But the current proposal isn't going to turn anything around. It's simply an achingly slow increment of what we already have. @babygiraffe doesn't even seem all that confident about it himself to me, hence his very conservative approach to implementing it. Nor did the wider market when it was originally announced. A more radical re-appraisal is needed IMO.

******************************************

Fork it.

True and the worst of it is that prospective investors don't even need to consciously think about this stuff for us to feel the negative effect.

The Dash ecosystem does it for them simply by needing to draw far more fiat liquidity from markets than our competitors do. We require to draw both the block mining cost PLUS the masternode revenues on top which our competitors don't. Reducing the mining reward doesn't reduce that mining cost. Only a reduction in mining competitiveness can do that which is something we do *not* want since it would indicate a decline in demand for the primary supply in general.