Search results

On the AMA broadcast last week, there was feedback from the community that an updated reward reallocation schedule would be helpful to the community. Background: A decision proposal passed in the July 2020 voting cycle. DCG implemented the change in the next major release in September 2020. The...

Late to the discussion on this... we are honestly just leaning toward unbranding it altogether, at least until we can conduct a proper assessment of the best terminology that will not cause confusion to the average user... and wouldn't cause some of the issues that I've read about in this thread...

Thank you for clarifying. It was not apparent - at least to me - that you were comparing to a scenario prior to the passing of the reallocation proposal (even after re-reading). Given that the other proposal introducing the reallocation is already passed and implemented on the network, that...

This is not a true statement. Just one example... with 8% approved for proposals the MNO allocation under the "DCG Plan" would be 55.2%. With the same 8% approved for proposals, the MNO allocation under the "MNO Plan" would be 56%. The maximum MNO allocation under the "DCG Plan" is 60%. The...

This is not a terrible solution, and you could even take it a bit further by having the ratio of unspent treasury paid to MNOs vary based on the exact ratio of MN collateral to total supply at the time of the superblock (i.e., the ratio of their benefit), rather than a fixed ratio. What are the...

To be clear, there is nothing about this proposed change that would prevent other ideas like the one you raise from being implemented. We do plan to continue having a small share of development devoted to governance improvements. Our governance works fairly well, but it is far from perfect. I...

I understand and appreciate your point of view on this. One angle of looking at it is that the MNOs could enrich themselves with "personal gain" by rejecting good proposals, just as you said. Another angle is that by introducing an incentive to not spend, MNOs are less likely to fully spend a...

To clarify my sentence, almost all of the activities I referenced - except the initial feedback in the Forum and the expert input we gathered during design itself - were done AFTER the proposed solution was presented to the network in June. The word "initial" referred only to the Forum posts...

As I said, we did not gather input from a single source. We gathered initial feedback on the Forums after the presentation last December, held several AMAs, videoconferences, interviews, chats, consulted with governance and finance experts, and held direct discussions with whales and our largest...

To clarify the intent on the part of DCG's proposed solution: 1) It is unlikely that the MNOs could increase their income very much - at least not without jeopardizing their collateral. The majority of the 10% of the budget approved today is DCG, and I believe it is safe to say the vast majority...

This option was discussed and actually included in the polls we held in the Discord MNO channel. While this approach provided admittedly informal data, the overwhelming majority of votes were to increase or even remove the cap entirely. Had there been any meaningful support for this option, we...

We will assess it on an ongoing basis and will publish a range of expected growth that we can measure against (this will be included in the proposal). If it deviates from the expected range for an extended period of time, or by an extreme amount, we can develop an appropriate course of action.

Is it possible to change the block reward? Yes, of course. Would it permanently solve for the circulating supply growth rate by simply changing the supply? No. This may seem counter-intuitive, so let me explain further. Increasing the block reward would cause ROI of masternodes to increase, so...

This idea has been suggested. There are several pros and cons. Because miners are ultimately making a bet on Dash, they have significant interest in seeing Dash succeed, not just masternode operators. The approach we've suggested in which the cost of proposals reduces both masternode and miner...

If approved, we would incorporate the changes into the Core product roadmap. Given these changes would require a protocol change, the new functionality would likely be included in a major release. Our Core software typically has a major release every 4-8 months, depending on the volume of...

Miner economics don't really work that way... the "cost" of a transaction to any Bitcoin-based network is the size of the data needing processing and storing. If you price Dash transactions in another way (e.g., as a % of the transaction), then other networks could underprice Dash fees...

I would say we have "more than we need" but there is little downside to having more than we need. The biggest downside is that the network becomes slightly less scalable and slightly slower the larger it gets. However, the effert is logarithmic rather than linear. This means the impact is pretty...

Yes, changing the fee is simply an optimization. It isn't a solution to any of the issues I raised (at least not in the short term and not on its own). ASU is actually engaged in research on the minimum size of the MN network to ensure high security. The transaction fees should eventually cover...

Locked inputs would be locked when formed. For example, there could be a button in a wallet that says "stake masternode collateral" or something to that effect. The user would click and be asked a series of questions. How much do you want to stake? How long do you want to lock it? What is the...

"Price" would be the wrong metric to use, because many many things can affect the price. Because the goal is to reduce the effect of inflation for users, I would measure the growth rate of circulating supply. If the approach is working, circulating supply growth would slow down. We are model...