New masternode payout split will create unbalanced incentives

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,154
1,250
1,183
It was recently announced that the masternode reward will be split, one half going to the payment side and the other half to those who opt-in to Dash Platform.

Why must I put 1000 dash collateral if I'm only running the dash payment node?

Why I am allowed to run a Dash Platform node without putting down extra collateral?


In all but name, it seems Core is creating two node types with unfair collateral requirements. This is exactly the reason I never wanted tiered collateral, because it is impossible to separate out and determine which process is doing the most work.

If the incentive to run a Dash Platform node is the fee reward, then can I run that node without 1000 dash collateral? Why not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AgnewPickens

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,804
955
183
It was recently announced that the masternode reward will be split, one half going to the payment side and the other half to those who opt-in to Dash Platform.

Why must I put 1000 dash collateral if I'm only running the dash payment node?

Why I am allowed to run a Dash Platform node without putting down extra collateral?


In all but name, it seems Core is creating two node types with unfair collateral requirements. This is exactly the reason I never wanted tiered collateral, because it is impossible to separate out and determine which process is doing the most work.

If the incentive to run a Dash Platform node is the fee reward, then can I run that node without 1000 dash collateral? Why not?
I don't think i heard Sam say that the masternode reward will be split, i think i heard Sam say that the Dash Platform fees / Platform Masternode Rewards will get reallocated between work that is being done on Core (general stuff i guess) and work that is being done on Platform (Drive storage stuff i guess). These Platform fees / Platform Masternode Rewards seem to get collected in some combined pool and then distributed on the PoW chain to the masternodes.

Which indicates to me that masternodes opting-out of Dash Platform get paid according the reallocation schedule of PoW : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/updated-mn-miner-reallocation-schedule.51453/ + some (minor) fee collection on the Dash Platform, for work done on Core

While those masternodes that opted-in for Dash Platform get paid according the reallocation schedule of PoW : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/updated-mn-miner-reallocation-schedule.51453/ + the (higher) fee collection on the Dash Platform, for work done on Platform.


Maybe i misunderstood Sam. It would be nice to get a clarification on this.
 
Last edited:

QuantumExplorer

Active Member
Dash Core Group
Aug 20, 2014
129
172
93
I think there is some misunderstanding. Right now rewards go to Core with a split between masternodes, miners and governance. The rewards that go to masternodes will further be split in half, 50% of them will still go to masternodes directly through core as is currently the case, the other 50% will go to a masternodes through platform, with masternodes being able to withdraw those rewards back to Dash from Credits (the platform currency - Not payment oriented). In the end masternodes that run Core and Platform will see the same if not slightly higher rewards (from platform fees). If a masternode were to only run Core they would get only 50% of their rewards. Most likely no MNO would want to only run core, as it won't make much sense financially to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stan.distortion

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,154
1,250
1,183
@QuantumExplorer I still don't understand. Why should someone put down 1000 dash collateral when they're choosing not to run Platform? Why should someone who opts-in to Platform pay no extra collateral? You are saying there is a cost to not running Platform - 50% less reward. You're effectively saying to run platform you need no extra skin in the game, yet to only run the payment side I must take a 50% hit with full skin in the game.

To put another way, if Dash Platform doesn't require additional collateral, then why do they need collateral at all? - because if they do need collateral then why is the collateral requirement the same for the payments-only side?
 

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,154
1,250
1,183
Most likely no MNO would want to only run core, as it won't make much sense financially to do so.
Surely this statement is recognition that a payment-only reward is unbalanced. Favor to one side at the expense of the other. If that's the case, why even make the Platform side optional? Optional in the sense that if you don't we'll financially decapitate you? What kind of socialism is this? Maybe we can say vaccines are "optional" but you pay more tax if you don't.
 

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,804
955
183
I think there is some misunderstanding. Right now rewards go to Core with a split between masternodes, miners and governance. The rewards that go to masternodes will further be split in half, 50% of them will still go to masternodes directly through core as is currently the case, the other 50% will go to a masternodes through platform, with masternodes being able to withdraw those rewards back to Dash from Credits (the platform currency - Not payment oriented). In the end masternodes that run Core and Platform will see the same if not slightly higher rewards (from platform fees). If a masternode were to only run Core they would get only 50% of their rewards. Most likely no MNO would want to only run core, as it won't make much sense financially to do so.
Any change in the split of the blockreward between miners, masternodes and the budget has been voted on by masternodes in the past, will there be a decision proposal about this new change to the network ?

And is this the only way to implement and distribute the platform fees among masternodes or are there other ways of doing this that does not involve changing the actual split of the blockrewards ? Frankly I thought we were done with changing the split of the blockrewards and were just going to follow the updated mn-miner reallocation schedule (https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/updated-mn-miner-reallocation-schedule.51453/).

I understand this only affect the masternode blockrewards portion, but cutting the masternode blockrewards in halve like this is still a change in the split of the blockrewards (a second re-allocation, this time concerning a specific portion of the blockrewards, in a relatively short period of time after the previous reallocation of the blockrewards). Also to me it seems like following both the updated mn-miner reallocation schedule and cutting the masternode portion in halve and needing to recalculate this every three months untill May 2025, will create its own complexity in coding and will make it more difficult to explain our split of the blockrewards to the outside world.
 
Last edited:

qwizzie

Well-known Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,804
955
183
I am still pondering the possible benefits for having a change in the reallocation of the blockreward once more (in the midst of an ongoing miner-masternode blockreward reallocation schedule), with the new proposed change in reallocation changing only the masternode part of the blockrewards, by cutting those in halve and letting masternode operators claim the other halve of the masternode blockrewards through Platform Credits, which can be withdrawn to dash.

One possible benefit i could see, is if this would reduce Dash supply inflation rate. By cutting the masternode blockrewards in halve, you reduce the newly created supply of Dash. But does this supply not increase again, once masternode operators start withdrawing their Platform Credits to dash ?
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,154
1,250
1,183
I'm guessing the Dash Credits will have tax implications for some people.

That aside, I'm hoping the collateral requirements will also be split, it seems like the only fair outcome. None of this fuzzy malarkey favoring one side at the cost of the other. The decision needs to be made whether Dash Platform is a base requirement or not.

Where are the Trust Protectors in all this, shouldn't they be protecting the network when significant policy changes are underway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AgnewPickens

xkcd

Active Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Feb 19, 2017
359
333
133
australia
mnowatch.org
Dash Address
XpoZXRfr2iFxWhfRSAK3j1jww9xd4tJVez
Interesting topic! Platform is not going to be part of the POSE system, good reasons for it, so to incentivise people running platform half the MN rewards will be held to ransom on platform.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: AgnewPickens