Thanks for remembering those details. Also I should add to automate the vote would be what most people will do. I was thinking we might have to add another option to that dropdown box which is "vote towards target" and have them vote to a target supply or price. Its possible to only let those decisions for each user run for a week or so to force them to occasionally check the software again to recast it. These are mostly user interface decisions but not protocol.

The idea of how centric do we want to make an algorithm gets closer to the heart of protocol.

Actually the frozen supply can effect demand in a good way. There is a bylaw being added to allow transfer of frozen supply on the condition it is locked in a 1 month time lock. This "slows" the frozen funds so you could just say there are variable speeds of liquidity. The slowed funds are used for bonds, credit swaps or trustless loans and really all kinds of cool instruments never before thought possible in crypto.

If there becomes a speculative market, i would think the frozen/slowed funds would become the speculative market. Because those give access to voting power, can be staked for interest and also serve as a future. It will be one helluva fun trading game.

I can see the peg falling into the situation you described. A few potential risks is it is deflated too much so the price goes way too high and cannot be recovered to that target. Another risk is the network can't agree on a supply so it gets stuck at a certain level.

But consider that there is always changes to the economy and the ones holding. So most likely it would never really get stuck at a specific supply. Someone who buys up 100% of the liquidity would end up seeing the supply inflate. So i think as long as there is consistent demand that is something we shouldn't worry about.

But lets say this happens. Then we would want to consider forking to update the algorithms perhaps?! The cool part about this is that its an awesome social experiment so we can see how it goes and adjust and get inspired to improve upon it with better algorithms.

In theory, we can do it based purely on algorithms without voting but for now I really like combining the two.

how much do you want for it then? it shouldnt be too much then

was it used for anything before? if yes how much visitors did it have regulary?

How come that you aren't running a faucet or made a page with a list of Bitcoin faucets ??
Anyway do you mind giving more informations please ?

• Website registered where ? Namecheap / GoDaddy / etc..
• How much you are looking for ? and what are the payment methods do you take

Btw , willing to go first or using an Escrow ?
~ Madness

- At all times no delegate may have more than 2% of the vote. Any transaction or block that would give a delegate more than 2% of the vote is to be rejected.

A system destined for growing centralisation can't be called decentralised. Where is the logic?

Good question. The original plan was to work with DPOS which is like Ripple but breaks some of the centralization with POS like. After discussions with HunterMinerCrafter we consider moving to plain POW. Please see above more about this subject.