[ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN

[appcapn]

How will the masternodes continue to earn after POW ends, will there be a percentage for them during POS as well?

[1714598545]

1714598545

[jakiman]

How will the masternodes continue to earn after POW ends, will there be a percentage for them during POS as well?

It hasn't been finalized yet. But it would have similar ratio to POS staking.
(like how it is with DASH where it's 1:1 between mining & masternode)

The split between the masternodes and the staker would still be using the seesaw mechanism we had discussed before. The numbers for the split between stakers and masternodes are still being hashed out. Our intent is still to have masternodes be only slightly more profitable than staking on a per coin basis when the network is balanced properly between coins staking and locked up in masternodes. We are really just trying to see how everyone feels about the overall block rewards and coin production. Once we are switched over to PoS we can reduce inflation by lowering the rewards for each block. What we want to do is start a conversation about the pros and cons of such substantial rewards reductions.

[StakeBox]

OK guys, while I appreciate everyone sharing thoughts and ideas, I think things are getting a little of course. We have a while to discuss and debate other aspects of the way things will work, crunch numbers, etc. Right now the question at hand, the one that sparked this flurry of conversation, has seen only one person weigh in with an opinion. Let's try and stay focused. How does everyone feel about the numbers s3v3n laid out? Are you in favor, or against? Why? There are a lot of smart people in here, with a lot of good questions, and a lot of valuable insight. If we don't try to keep the conversation revolving around one specific item at a time we will just go down the rabbit hole and never come to any firm conclusions on any particular subject. Again, for the sake of steering things back on course:

As we work on the PoS implementation that is still a few months away, We have been discussing some potential numbers for the Reward values for the PoS phase. We wanted to get everyones opinions, good or bad.. In the end this is a Community Driven Coin and thats the way we want it.

So here are some possible numbers, keep in mind that these are not in concrete, and are to stimulate some discussion. after a few days of discussion, if there are not any major issues i will post it for formal vote.

If for some reason you are not in favor, please explain why you feel this way.


PoS Phase 1: (50 DNET per block) Blocks 259201 - 777600 [518400 blocks per year] 25,920,000 DNET

PoS Phase 2: (25 DNET per block) Blocks 777601 - 1296000 [518400 blocks per year] 12,960,000 DNET

PoS Phase 3: (5 DNET per block) Blocks 1296001- 1814400 [518400 blocks per year] 2,592,000 DNET

PoS Phase 4: (2.5 DNET per block) Blocks 1814401 + [518400 blocks per year] 1,296,000 per yr there after


let us know your feelings..

Food for thought, personally, I am torn. I agree that we don't want to have billions of coins in the long run, and that cutting the rewards once we hit PoS is the thing to do. My concern is that these numbers may cut them too much too fast. I can envision a scenario where as we approach the end of PoW knowing the rewards will drop many masternode owners would shut them down and cash out. Without an equally drastic rise in the price at around the same time as the drop in rewards the return from running a masternode would be dramatically reduced. Masternode owners shutting down and cashing out would cause the price to drop, further exacerbating the reduced income from owning a masternode and perpetuating the cycle. I am sure things would level out at some point, but the unpredictability and volatility would not be good for the coin as a whole.

Feel free to tell me I am thinking about it all wrong, and why. I would like to see these numbers become the ones we use for PoS. At the same time, I want it to be because it is the right thing for the long term health of DarkNet, and not just because large holders, myself included, would stand to make a quick profit.

[bathrobehero]

Masternode only slightly more profitable than staking? I wouldn't feel incentivized to run a masternode if that was the case.   

Fluctuations in price mean I could have accumulated more DNET this last month if I'd day-traded, as opposed to holding in a masternode.  If I was just staking in wallet because masternode was only slightly more profitable, that's exactly what I would have done:  traded and moved coins back & forth to wallet to stake, with less long term incentive to hold.

Setting up a masternode was a hassle, updating was a hassle, paying hosting invoices a hassle, not to mention the additional cost.  I am not going to be doing this for a slight and negligible profit in an uncertain market.

One of the features of this coin is it currently has a strong network 700+ masternodes and growing.  I see the strength of the network being a USP in the future.  Lots of coins have lots of POS participants, lots of coins don't have a 1000, maybe 2000+ masternodes.  It should be a priority to encourage and achieve this.

I agree with everything you said. Masternodes shouldn't be just slightly more profitable than just having a bunch of coins staking.

I could be wrong but as far as I understand for the system determining PoS rewards will only look at how many coins are being staked and not by how many nodes so there's not really an incentive for decentralization or a checking mechanism to see just how decentralized the staking wallets are.
We want proper decentralization from PoS while typically the only people willing to stake coins are the ones who have a lot. People with a few coins rarely bother staking. But if you increase their rewards then masternodes disappear and start staking instead.


Regarding the proposition above I think there shouldn't be sharp cuts in emission (halvings) because that would mean a lot of people would sell off at each halving because each halving significantly cuts profitability on both the masternode and staking side. Every big drop would cripple the coin a bit.

I think the decrease should be much more gradual. Maybe even from PoW to PoS the transition in rewards should be much smoother (though I wouldn't be comfortable if staking would get any closer to mining profitability-wise).

[DRPD]

OK guys, ...

As we work on the PoS implementation that is still a few months away, We have been discussing some potential numbers for the Reward values for the PoS phase. We wanted to get everyones opinions, good or bad.. In the end this is a Community Driven Coin and thats the way we want it.

So here are some possible numbers, keep in mind that these are not in concrete, and are to stimulate some discussion. after a few days of discussion, if there are not any major issues i will post it for formal vote.

If for some reason you are not in favor, please explain why you feel this way.


PoS Phase 1: (50 DNET per block) Blocks 259201 - 777600 [518400 blocks per year] 25,920,000 DNET

PoS Phase 2: (25 DNET per block) Blocks 777601 - 1296000 [518400 blocks per year] 12,960,000 DNET

PoS Phase 3: (5 DNET per block) Blocks 1296001- 1814400 [518400 blocks per year] 2,592,000 DNET

PoS Phase 4: (2.5 DNET per block) Blocks 1814401 + [518400 blocks per year] 1,296,000 per yr there after


let us know your feelings..

Food for thought, personally, I am torn. I agree that we don't want to have billions of coins in the long run, and that cutting the rewards once we hit PoS is the thing to do. My concern is that these numbers may cut them too much too fast. I can envision a scenario where as we approach the end of PoW knowing the rewards will drop many masternode owners would shut them down and cash out. Without an equally drastic rise in the price at around the same time as the drop in rewards the return from running a masternode would be dramatically reduced. Masternode owners shutting down and cashing out would cause the price to drop, further exacerbating the reduced income from owning a masternode and perpetuating the cycle. I am sure things would level out at some point, but the unpredictability and volatility would not be good for the coin as a whole.

.....

I agree with your points and i'm 100% sure most of the mn's will be sut down if its not worth to let them run.

however my problem: it is impossible to decide this atm for me. we have no clue how much a dnet will be worth if we switch from pow to pos.
i think we need a system to ensure that it will be worth (cover costs at least) to run a masternode at anytime or most of them will be shut down.

if we can do this (and pls don't ask my how  ) we can cut staking rewards even more in my opinion.

sorry if my answer is "out of course" again but thats how i see it and its is almost impossible for me to decide staking rates atm.

 

[4x13]

OK guys, ...

As we work on the PoS implementation that is still a few months away, We have been discussing some potential numbers for the Reward values for the PoS phase. We wanted to get everyones opinions, good or bad.. In the end this is a Community Driven Coin and thats the way we want it.

So here are some possible numbers, keep in mind that these are not in concrete, and are to stimulate some discussion. after a few days of discussion, if there are not any major issues i will post it for formal vote.

If for some reason you are not in favor, please explain why you feel this way.


PoS Phase 1: (50 DNET per block) Blocks 259201 - 777600 [518400 blocks per year] 25,920,000 DNET

PoS Phase 2: (25 DNET per block) Blocks 777601 - 1296000 [518400 blocks per year] 12,960,000 DNET

PoS Phase 3: (5 DNET per block) Blocks 1296001- 1814400 [518400 blocks per year] 2,592,000 DNET

PoS Phase 4: (2.5 DNET per block) Blocks 1814401 + [518400 blocks per year] 1,296,000 per yr there after


let us know your feelings..

Food for thought, personally, I am torn. I agree that we don't want to have billions of coins in the long run, and that cutting the rewards once we hit PoS is the thing to do. My concern is that these numbers may cut them too much too fast. I can envision a scenario where as we approach the end of PoW knowing the rewards will drop many masternode owners would shut them down and cash out. Without an equally drastic rise in the price at around the same time as the drop in rewards the return from running a masternode would be dramatically reduced. Masternode owners shutting down and cashing out would cause the price to drop, further exacerbating the reduced income from owning a masternode and perpetuating the cycle. I am sure things would level out at some point, but the unpredictability and volatility would not be good for the coin as a whole.

.....

I agree with your points and i'm 100% sure most of the mn's will be sut down if its not worth to let them run.

however my problem: it is impossible to decide this atm for me. we have no clue how much a dnet will be worth if we switch from pow to pos.
i think we need a system to ensure that it will be worth (cover costs at least) to run a masternode at anytime or most of them will be shut down.

if we can do this (and pls don't ask my how  ) we can cut staking rewards even more in my opinion.

sorry if my answer is "out of course" again but thats how i see it and its is almost impossible for me to decide staking rates atm.

 

There really is no way to 'Ensure' or 'Guarantee' a certain value, but it was stated from the very beginning, this coin was never intended to be a get rich quick 'Pump and Dump' Coin. We will be rolling out updates at a regular interval, and will not be making promises that we can't keep.

It was explained in the beginning how the PoS mechanism would work. There will be a certain percentage of masternodes that will need to be maintained in order to keep an even reward distribution. Too many Masternodes and the staking reward increases, to much staking and the masternode reward increases... This discussion is supposed to be about the coin supply. A few weeks ago, many were complaining about the coin supply being too high, and these numbers will fix that issue while allowing the PoW distribution to continue. If you feel the coin supply is fine, tell us why, if you feel that you like the proposed PoS supply options, let us know.

[shintosai]

I think dev stated this well so the conflict already been answered, we just needed to support dev for this plan, just like what it said it is not a pump and dump coin there are big future plans for this coin to work and for us to earn more we just need to wait and see.

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

Well I've been out of the game for a long while figured it was time to get back in lol This coin and project looks really interesting so I've decided to start with this one Cheers

[EleanorZ]

If you feel the coin supply is fine, tell us why, if you feel that you like the proposed PoS supply options, let us know.

I don't feel strongly about the actual numbers; I think if development continues and features are added, the coin will have value in the long term regardless. Arguments for one number or another ultimately depend on speculative assumptions about DNET's future value anyway. But whatever numbers are chosen, I'd prefer the reduction follow a predictable pattern. For example, in the proposed system, the drop from 25 to 5 (1/5) is out of keeping with that between the other phases (1/2). Perhaps strict linearity (50-25-12.5-6.25-3.125...) is no good because it entails awkward fractions and a slower path to 2.5, but even something like 50-25-10-5-2.5 (so, one extra phase but linear-ish) might soften the blow. At the other extreme, something like 50-15-5-2.5 (so, nearly exponential decay) could also work. I just find the 1/2 - 1/5 - 1/2 pattern seems arbitrary, and I think it would create unnecessary drama around the 5x reduction.

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

Hey quick question about the POS for this coin.  Do we just leave our wallets open and unlocked and POS will just automatically happen? I only ask cause this is a little higher test of a wallet then I'm used to and want to make sure that I got everything all set up properly Cheers

[tintumon]

My wallet is not able to sync.
- No sources found
I added all the addnode=* to the darknet.cfg file.
Is there anything else I have to do?

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

My wallet is not able to sync.
- No sources found
I added all the addnode=* to the darknet.cfg file.
Is there anything else I have to do?

You have to close the wallet after you create the .conf file and fire it back up again I know that much lol Whether or not that helps you or not lol

[4x13]

Hey quick question about the POS for this coin.  Do we just leave our wallets open and unlocked and POS will just automatically happen? I only ask cause this is a little higher test of a wallet then I'm used to and want to make sure that I got everything all set up properly Cheers

PoS does not start until block 259201

[tintumon]

My wallet is not able to sync.
- No sources found
I added all the addnode=* to the darknet.cfg file.
Is there anything else I have to do?

You have to close the wallet after you create the .conf file and fire it back up again I know that much lol Whether or not that helps you or not lol

tried that, but no luck.

[4x13]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

[tintumon]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

No it is darknet.conf file.
The wallet says
Synchronising with network... 8 weeks behind for the last 20 mns or so without any progress.

And when I trie to see the  peer list from Tools, nothing is there.

[tintumon]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

No it is darknet.conf file.
The wallet says
Synchronising with network... 8 weeks behind for the last 20 mns or so without any progress.

And when I trie to see the  peer list from Tools, nothing is there.

It is synching now.
I dont know why it took a good half an hour without any activity.
I should have waited a bit more before posting here for help.
All working as expected now.

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

No it is darknet.conf file.
The wallet says
Synchronising with network... 8 weeks behind for the last 20 mns or so without any progress.

And when I trie to see the  peer list from Tools, nothing is there.

It is synching now.
I dont know why it took a good half an hour without any activity.
I should have waited a bit more before posting here for help.
All working as expected now.

Ahh That's what these places are for though bro is for people to get help when they need it Cheers

[4x13]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

No it is darknet.conf file.
The wallet says
Synchronising with network... 8 weeks behind for the last 20 mns or so without any progress.

And when I trie to see the  peer list from Tools, nothing is there.

It is synching now.
I dont know why it took a good half an hour without any activity.
I should have waited a bit more before posting here for help.
All working as expected now.

Good to hear, Welcome to the group..

[tintumon]

are you naming your darknet.conf file with a '.cfg'??

No it is darknet.conf file.
The wallet says
Synchronising with network... 8 weeks behind for the last 20 mns or so without any progress.

And when I trie to see the  peer list from Tools, nothing is there.

It is synching now.
I dont know why it took a good half an hour without any activity.
I should have waited a bit more before posting here for help.
All working as expected now.

Good to hear, Welcome to the group..

Thanks for the help. Hoping to run a masternode tomorrow.