And here is how masternodes owners responded
Dont you see that there is an obvious problem in your 1000 dash masternode tarrif model?
Dont you see that whales are not enough, and that you also need some other species to be able to vote in your ecosystem?
Demo, I have put you on "parole" here, because when you are in good mood you can be a good source of info (as you have been digging around, while I haven't had enough time to be moping around here lately... Anyway, it is against my nature to ignore people, I really feel sad with it)
So, I'll try to share with you what I believe is the logic behind this stuff, that at least makes sense in my head, and I hope that I will not be speaking to the walls.
The most important premise to have in mind is that DASH is not a monopoly. (*1)
If one is not satisfied, he can avoid buying DASH, or sell what he already has and buy into any other thing... he can even fork DASH and do the perfect cryptocurrency of his dreams.
A focus point to consider is the fact that the more someone has invested in a project, the more they want it (even, depend on it) to succeed (unless the "investor" is not an investor, but an attacker (*2)
). So, unless the person is a complete stupid, it is expected that he will think thoroughly about a proposal before voting on it.
Potentialy good decisions will be made. But even if the decisions are not as good as they should have been, the ones to lose more, are the Masternode owners. Each and every person will lose or gain in proportion to their holdings, so it seems fair to me that the bigger holders have a specific way to make decisions on the network
Why is it important that the bigger holders have a specific way to make decisions on the network
Because the other players already have their own voice (their specific way to make decisions on the network):
- Miners: their voice is the hashrate. If the so called "core team" acts dishonestly, or if the Masternoders make bad decisions, the Miners will respond, by mining a "better coin". Likewise, if the market decides to fly elsewhere, the hashrate goes together;
- Developers: (and here I equal "core team" to developers, because that's how I understood DASH nowadays) Their voice is the hability to put into code what the system needs (in their perspective, ultimately). But if they act against the will of the other parts, irresposibly, dishonestly, and even arrogantly, they risk be left alone... and what is the use to be left alone on a P2P cryptocurrency network: without investors, without users, without the market DASH value is ZERO;
- Merchants: If DASH proves to be worth, the merchants will adopt it. If it appears to be scam, they will ignore it... anyway, if there are plenty of users, the merchants will stay with DASH. Merchants want a useful currency (not a fairy tale democracy);
- Users: If DASH proves to be worth, the users will adopt it. If it appears to be scam, they will ignore it... anyway, if there are plenty of merchants, the users will stay with DASH. Users want a useful currency (not a fairy tale democracy);
- The Market: The Market will put their money on what they believe will give them a good return. If DASH is a dreamers land voting system, or if DASH is a scam to benefit a superior caste (be it named core or masternoder or whatever), the Market will also ignore DASH. The price will reflect the value: a serious project has more value, so it tends to have a better market price;
- The Masternode owners: Are risking their pockets... they must make the correct choices.... or die
Do you notice the balance? Each of these players have got their own ways not only to influence, but to efectively control the way DASH develops. One depends, and must respect, the other.
Before, the "bigger investors" were like hostages of the other players, because they did not have a voice of their own. So they didn't care, they could fly from one cryptocurrency to the other (pumps and dumps). Now, DASH brought them the possibility to have a voice on the network, and better, providing important core services: the soul of the DASH (*4)
What is the Soul of the DASH?
I will repeat myself again here... better yet, out of lazyness, I'll quote myself:
Have you noticed how fast it is to sync a DASH full node (compare it with bitcoin or ethereum or whatever). Will 50 dash masternodes be as reliable? You are too focused on "voting". But voting is not DASH's real focus. Voting is as important as nada if DASH is not even able to do the basic: being a decent digital cash.
Full disclosure: I despise all this nonsense focus on democracy to this project, because this is a waste of time.
DASH has got exactly the same upper limit of decentralization of any other blockchain based currency, including bitcoin. The Masternodes are not the only full nodes on the DASH network: the miners are full nodes, and even your home DASH core is as full node as any other. The difference is: the Masternodes are nodes with a minimun quality requirement (at least running 24/7 on fast VPS, and all other bla bla bla that will allow you to sync your home node reliably faster than any other shitcoin, and also to provide reliable mixing service <- the most important when it comes to DASH). Prove that your 2 dash home node connected to a shit ISP will be as reliable as a seriously hosted one, and you win the game.
Now, regarding "democracy": It should be adopted into DASH as long as it is the strict necessary for the minimum necessary governance of the cryptocurrency. IMHO, if we waste too much time discussing, instead of acting, DASH is doomed.
What is DASH's vocation: to be a decent digital cash
or to be an attempted improvement of Brazilian's sick voting machine
I would prefer that we leave the "world democracy dream" to a specifit separate project, lest we end up with neither the cash nor the honest voting...
attacker, because a very rich entity cound potentially buy up a hubongous amount of DASH, and put up Masternodes in order to make bad decisions, aiming to destroy the network... in this case, the price of DASH will increase so marvelously, that all the previous DASH owners (even the 1 DASH owners) will have sold it with a very good profit, anyway, and won't be affected by the destiny of the project.
I have been considerate to you, trying to honestly put these comments here, I hope you can make a good use of it. I have got no intentions to take this conversation any longer, though, simply because it is not the most important thing to my life... as implied above, (*1)
if DASH starts a weird nonsense journey with dubious decisions, I have no problems selling all I have, because there are some good projects out there that I can keep my hard earned money in
Ok, bye, it's sunny, and I am going to the beach
edit: to try to stick to the subject of this thread, my opinion: I wish DASH gave a little more importance to the contributions from individual users, independent contributions, instead of only focusing their attention to "the core"... and this message is mainly to the Masternoders...
The core team is doing their job, and I am ok with it up to now (nothing can be perfect for everyone), but the rest of the community seem to be too dependent of the "core", and is forgetting about the rest....
As I have said elsewhere: support, recognition, attention, the deserved manifestation of gratitude towards individual efforts from the community, are great examples of incentives (much more efficient than money, most of the times), but I fear that sometimes the community does not see things this way...
ok, if this is already our "corporate model", so I think that makes sense, anyway...