Agreed that more official posts would be nice, but the community does keep this thread up to date. @fuongy does most of the work (not actually sure if (s)he's official or not, tbh), and I chip in from time to time as well, plus others. The block reward change was discussed on March 3rd, right after details emerged. Remember that the transition to zPiv staking took about a month longer than expected, and the details were discussed before the initial roll-out date.
Also, the PIVX subreddit is fairly active, and is another easy source of info for those who prefer to avoid Discord.
I'm addressing this in a separate comment because I suspect there's a fair bit of confusion about the issue, and it's important that people understand what's coming. We don't need any more excitement like with the not-very-well announced auto-zeromint 'surprise'.
First, once zPiv staking is implemented,
new blocks will be found by MNs, regular Piv stakers, and zPiv stakers. While the outcome will be slightly different depending on who finds the block, the basic idea of 'finding a block' will be the same regardless. In other words, to directly answer the question, the implementation of zPiv simply provides another way in which new blocks can be made.
Now, here are some additional factors to consider re: the implementation of zPiv staking. I am not a Dev or in any way associated with the PIVX team; this is just based on my reading of publicly-available information--if a Dev contradicts this, believe them, not me.
First,
the see-saw mechanism will be removed because 1 is the smallest zPiv accumulator value, and the block rewards will therefore have to be multiples of 1. The dynamic nature of the see-saw approach results in constantly varying fractions, which are unfortunately not compatible with zPiv. This will change the incentive structure somewhat, and in fact the new system will be deliberately designed to incentivize the conversion of Piv to zPiv. Which brings up the next point--
Second,
block rewards will increase from 5 Piv to 6 Piv, distributed as follows:
- if a Piv staker or masternode finds the block: 3 Piv to MN; 2 Piv to Staker; 1 Piv to budget
- if a zPiv staker finds the block: 2 Piv to MN; 3 Piv to Staker; 1 Piv to budget
As you can see, this means that the total 'public' reward increases from 4.5, as it currently is, to 5. Meanwhile, the allocation to budget increases from 0.5, as it currently is, to 1 (as is currently the case, any unused budget--e.g. if there are not enough proposals to spend it--is
burnt each month). You'll also see that the reward for staking zPiv is 50% greater than for staking regular Piv (3 vs. 2).
Third, the potential increase in supply is offset by the strong incentive to convert Piv to zPiv for the purposes of staking. zPiv transactions are more expensive, and fees (plus 'extra' budget) will continue to be burnt. If you run the math, it turns out that
the 'tipping point' between inflation and deflation is somewhere between 2.8 and 10 zPiv (not Piv) transactions per second. (Variation is based on what assumptions you make; most likely numbers are toward the lower end of that range. Note also that because unused budget is burnt, voting for or against proposals effectively amounts to a choice between implementing a feature or reducing the supply). Whatever the exact tipping point number is, if zPiv transactions/second exceed that number then PIVX will be deflationary, even with the increased reward structure. Less than that number, and it will remain inflationary.
Overall, these changes are in line with PIVX's goal of implementing full-time anonymity features.
Stakers are the primary block validators on a PoS network, while masternodes are 'facilitators' that offer an extra layer of verification, improve transaction time, and allow the blockchain to be downloaded faster. In effect, Stakers are 'must haves' while masternodes are 'nice-to-haves'; meanwhile, if full-time anonymity is considered important, then converting most Piv to zPiv is a borderline 'must have' also. The incentive being given to stake zPiv reinforces these facts and takes PIVX closer to full-time anonymity. Note also that non-masternode-based voting options will eventually be rolled out (
https://github.com/PIVX-Project/CDG), so any significant increase in staking shouldn't adversely affect the passing of proposals or other governance activities in the long run.
Meanwhile, the allocation to budget is being increased to reflect the need for strong, ongoing development during this formative--and competitive--period. It will allow PIVX to continue to hire and pay the best Devs (for reference, currently core devs are paid 1000 Piv/mo to work full time) and implement new features faster and more successfully--and, if unused, it will be burnt and further reduce inflation. Long term, especially if/when PIVX's price increases, the budget allocation may be reduced, but even now it's less than the allocation found in many other projects. And the overall increase from 5 to 6 Piv per block is offset by the expected increase in the number of zPiv transactions. Fees will still be burnt, and PIVX will remain barely inflationary, or quite possibly deflationary as the number of transactions increases.
Finally, the system may need to be tweaked once implemented. It's difficult to foresee all ramifications of a change like this. The community is very active in discussing these kinds of things (mostly on Discord), so if anyone has more to add to the discussion there will certainly be opportunities.
**In retrospect, I should clarify one thing above: excess budget is in fact not burnt each month; it is never created in the first place. The outcome is the same as far as the supply is concerned, though.
Poll
