• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Flexible Proposal System

I liked Ryan's idea about reducing miner reward -- my only comment is why must we move at such a glacial pace? We can't move one percent per month?
Regarding Ryan's masternode shares idea. I was initially impressed with this. But now I have some reservations:

1. Is this projected to result in less actual reward (in USD) for existing masternodes.* If so, why would MNOs approve such a move?
2. I often say, "The purpose of Dash is not to fill the universe with masternodes." If we already have enough masternodes, why do this?

* The increase in masternodes would presumably raise the price of Dash.
I like the masternode shares idea.

I don't like removing the treasury's 10% limit or upping the treasury's limit to 20%.
I also don't like flexible block rewards, where masternode owners could end up getting less MN rewards and which introduce an element of uncertainty and possibly
even strenghten already existing voting manipulation by entities with a large number of masternodes.
Flexible block rewards could even introduce unwanted / unintended voting behavior, where masternode owners don't take the time anymore to evaluate proposals and just downvote them to protect their own masternode reward.

I would vote against such a change in our governance model.
Last edited: