Leaderboard

I would've liked to see the Foundation continue. At the current moment in time though, I understand the wish to end it since there is no tested-to-work tech for the fair distribution (self-sovereign/decentralized ID, WOT, voting systems).. as well as the inability of our small community to launch the many centralized experiments we've discussed/planned/outlined to attract wider user base Option 3 I dislike, since there are a bunch of coins in lost privkeys (and possibly in questionable entities possession; case Cryptsy) -> Drags out the "full supply" of coins available for circulation.

@jtimon, could you maybe say what you thought would be a good set of parameters for Option 2? I assume this would set the time frame and payment regime for the Foundation funds? Anyway, option 3 looks bad. One thing there is to learn about the Foundation is that bad optics should be avoided. While the Foundation funds have remained mostly untouched, people had viewed it as a possible scam. So then we distribute the Foundation funds and the richest people get richer--pure POS. After we multiply all address balances by 5, what then? Where are you going to spend it? Its like you and your fr

@Arcurus POS is surely useful to keep the coins from the exchange what is artificial demand that is created. But Demurrage is to encourage the stakeholder to lend their money for zero interest, POS is doing the opposite. I know that you want the currency to be some sort of governmental structure (perform lending and distribution -which is a honorable idea) but i don't see that it is doable. And with so many different ideas in the pipe i think it is better to build a bank that is doing the social lending and some charity that supports social organizations (both then are not part of the cur

My intention is not to "abandon the coin and let it die" but that doesn't mean maaku, me or any other voluntary should be bullied for using (or not) their time as a voluntary however they want. Please, @Arcurus stop telling other volunteers how they should spend their time. You are free to spend your own time however you want. When things don't happen as fast as you wanted them to happen (or just don't happen at all), don't blame other volunteers for not having done them: blame yourself for not having done more to make them happen. @Bicknellski volunteers that are developers don't have spe

i wish you and maaku would take part in a more detailed discussion about pos. I dont think that it's flawed, to be clear im talking about a POS POW combination not pure POS. to be more clear, im not talking about a peer coin like POS. im talking about a dash like layer two POS POW combination. yes i also think the peer coin POS implementation is flawed, but up to now i dont see a big flaw that cannot be solved in the layer two dash like POS. please take part in the discussion here: what is the alternative? proof of work as it is now means that each year 5% from that > 8

It might be tangential to this discussion, however it is not tangential to this community in that if you promise to deliver changes on what we are voting on then fail to follow up on developing the coin further why should we invest time? You and Mark have not really been setting development goals and updating the coin over the past two years. I think it is also important to note that giving up on the idea of foundation (Mark and Jorge's idea) is just one more signal that you want to divest yourself of responsibility to this tiny community. That might not be the intention but it sure is what so