Fair number of coins kept by dev

[axismundi]

Just a little research into the right numbers for coin retention and distribution

What do you think is fair given, say, a 6 month full time time commitment from the said individual and no ICO/startup funding

Any other mitigating circumstances?

Eager to hear your thoughts

AM

[axismundi]

Not more than 2% consider acceptable value.
Thus, coin holders, are more confident in the development, rather than banal sink.

Great that's what I've been working off!

All the early adopters including the developer of Carboncoin are all capped at 2% ownership, with the only exception being the charity which has had about 4 donated

[americanpegasus]

Zero. 
 
but...   
 
Zero.

[axismundi]

Zero. 
 
but...   
 
Zero.

but an early adopter might own how many in your opinion?

[DaveyJones]

Zero. 
 
but...   
 
Zero.

but an early adopter might own how many in your opinion?

It is on the market to decide that...

[axismundi]

Zero. 
 
but...   
 
Zero.

but an early adopter might own how many in your opinion?

It is on the market to decide that...

Do you think there's a point, in percentage terms, where the size of one individual's holdings would have a negative effect on the price?

[robelneo]

I voted 0.2-0.4% the devs should have funds that he can use to fund related projects for his coin or the project will just stand still or no movement at all,the devs handle marketing and development of his coin not all holders are willing to donate funds for his continous works

[americanpegasus]

Zero. 
 
but...   
 
Zero.

but an early adopter might own how many in your opinion?

It is on the market to decide that...

Do you think there's a point, in percentage terms, where the size of one individual's holdings would have a negative effect on the price?

Considering Satoshi owned 10% of Bitcoin, probably not, though it does create a bad situation.  On the other hand, there are some technologies where one holder controlling too many tokens could break privacy features. 

[axismundi]

Considering Satoshi owned 10% of Bitcoin, probably not, though it does create a bad situation.  On the other hand, there are some technologies where one holder controlling too many tokens could break privacy features. 

Ten percent seems like a disproportionately high amount for someone to own if they develop the thing in the first place, but having manually distributed coins on a network for over 2 years I can readily see how a 10% shareholding might come about in the normal organic growth and development of this technology.

I have consistently sold coins to keep my holdings reasonable, and also limited the amounts we will sell to those investing so that we can make sure that we benefit as much as possible from the network effect.

If you look at many rich lists an approximately 10% max holding appears to be commonplace - but individuals with that many coins would be able to manipulate the markets freely, however this does not seem to put off investors and these coins are often very successful.

Do you think an oligarchy is necessary for driving demand and value appreciation?



Obviously PoS coins pay an "interest rate" to incentivise people to hold onto them, and masternode networks allow mining in proportion to coin holdings. Both of these things incentivise people to acquire an increasing stake. I ask because Carboncoin does not have that, our focus being on raw capital growth.

[spartak_t]

Most of you voted "Nothing at all", but you must be joking, right? Let's say that a developer has 0.5% of the entire supply. That would give him like $5,000 if the coin reaches $1Mn market cap. Don't you think that this is unfair? I see nothing wrong if the developer of a particular coin holds a bit more of it as long as he is not buying before releasing some news and selling when he knows it goes nowhere...

[axismundi]

Most of you voted "Nothing at all", but you must be joking, right? Let's say that a developer has 0.5% of the entire supply. That would give him like $5,000 if the coin reaches $1Mn market cap. Don't you think that this is unfair? I see nothing wrong if the developer of a particular coin holds a bit more of it as long as he is not buying before releasing some news and selling when he knows it goes nowhere...

I think "nothing at all" assumes that the developer has raised enough funds to start the thing on a salary anyway, not sure if this is the crypto-startup status quo these days. There is nothing about an ICO in the question for example.

Could there be legal ramifications if the person who is starting the network at genesis block effectively issues himself with coins? 

It makes clear sense that those who help a network are rewarded for doing so

[Ayers]

Most of you voted "Nothing at all", but you must be joking, right? Let's say that a developer has 0.5% of the entire supply. That would give him like $5,000 if the coin reaches $1Mn market cap. Don't you think that this is unfair? I see nothing wrong if the developer of a particular coin holds a bit more of it as long as he is not buying before releasing some news and selling when he knows it goes nowhere...

i think he need to use those money for the development of the coin, and not for dumping his own coin for bitcoin like 99,99% of dev do lol, soif he is a legit dev i would say that 15 is ok to give him as a reward to develop further his coin, otherwise zero coins is always good, because he need to mine like any other here

[axismundi]

Most of you voted "Nothing at all", but you must be joking, right? Let's say that a developer has 0.5% of the entire supply. That would give him like $5,000 if the coin reaches $1Mn market cap. Don't you think that this is unfair? I see nothing wrong if the developer of a particular coin holds a bit more of it as long as he is not buying before releasing some news and selling when he knows it goes nowhere...

i think he need to use those money for the development of the coin, and not for dumping his own coin for bitcoin like 99,99% of dev do lol, soif he is a legit dev i would say that 15 is ok to give him as a reward to develop further his coin, otherwise zero coins is always good, because he need to mine like any other here

Interesting point about dev mining, but it is very difficult to avoid conflicts of interest if you are able to know when key events are happening. I'm not sure Devs should mine in a fair system, past keeping the network going.

For example you might get in touch with the owner of your main pool to have his service go down at a critical moment so you can take advantage of, for example, a marked difficulty reduction - all sorts of stuff like this can and does happen

Definitely also a valid point about market abuse from @spartak_t

[spartak_t]

What I meant was that "Nothing at all" sounds like people want developers to work for free. I am not all against ICO's, because I see nothing wrong with "funding some brains", but far too many scams happened. If a developer has funds and want to invest them in his coin, then it's good. He can then rent miners and mine as much as he can. Premine doesn't work very well nowadays. Majority of the people do care only about Bitcoin and few others. Try gather a team funded with the premine (without selling it for BTC). Believe me. it is extremely hard.

[axismundi]

What I meant was that "Nothing at all" sounds like people want developers to work for free. I am not all against ICO's, because I see nothing wrong with "funding some brains", but far too many scams happened. If a developer has funds and want to invest them in his coin, then it's good. He can then rent miners and mine as much as he can. Premine doesn't work very well nowadays. Majority of the people do care only about Bitcoin and few others. Try gather a team funded with the premine (without selling it for BTC). Believe me. it is extremely hard.

Tell me about it!

Carboncoin has been running for 2 years and self funded, we also had to do a community takeover when the original developer disappeared in questionable circumstances...

We're just working on a new feature which will prevent our future helpers from exchanging their rewards straight away, and i'm also considering implementing a staking reward for a little while to give people some incentive to accumulate coins.

Nothing like a bit of hard work

[BellaBitBit]

I went with over 2% because I have worked on enough tech projects to know you need funding to continue dev.  Stressing about where the money is going to come from impedes development. Sometimes you need badly to hire coders for different parts in order to keep it moving.  Then branding...quality branding is expensive and this area must not be bypassed.

[spartak_t]

What I meant was that "Nothing at all" sounds like people want developers to work for free. I am not all against ICO's, because I see nothing wrong with "funding some brains", but far too many scams happened. If a developer has funds and want to invest them in his coin, then it's good. He can then rent miners and mine as much as he can. Premine doesn't work very well nowadays. Majority of the people do care only about Bitcoin and few others. Try gather a team funded with the premine (without selling it for BTC). Believe me. it is extremely hard.

Tell me about it!

I will. I am part of the FailCommunity team, which supports FailCoin for more than 2 years as well. We are 12 people from 10 different countries. All of us are working for a specific % of the coin and as one of the Project leaders, I really know how hard it is. Especially to find honest people out there.

[axismundi]

I went with over 2% because I have worked on enough tech projects to know you need funding to continue dev.  Stressing about where the money is going to come from impedes development. Sometimes you need badly to hire coders for different parts in order to keep it moving.  Then branding...quality branding is expensive and this area must not be bypassed.

+1

One of the hardest things I've been though is watching people who believe in my project, and want to be a part of it, move on to a new thing because of not being able to get paid.

Carboncoin is certainly the last project I will be doing without raising money at the proof of concept stage because of that.

The decision not to jump into getting funding straight away was that we wanted to spread the coin out widely and fairly while it was at low value, and we've been relatively successful at that - but it has ended up costing much more in non monetary terms!

[axismundi]

I will. I am part of the FailCommunity team, which supports FailCoin for more than 2 years as well. We are 12 people from 10 different countries. All of us are working for a specific % of the coin and as one of the Project leaders, I really know how hard it is. Especially to find honest people out there.

The lesson I learnt is if a system relies to much on honesty then it's probably not really suitable for humans

There's a really good documentary on netflix about it called "(dis)honesty" which I would very much recommend


At the heart of the Carboncoin are 8 who help regularly and many many more on stand by.

We've grown a community of about 500 people who have bought coins to hold on to since we started.

We've done our best to ensure that no one individual owns more than 2% apart from the charity which has just over 4%. That said, many have come and gone seeking short term gains to throw at the next pump. They don't do anyone any good.

A pleasure to make your acquaintance.

[spartak_t]

The lesson I learnt is if a system relies to much on honesty then it's probably not really suitable for humans

Well, it can actually work. I know the real identity of pretty much everybody (except the dev and three other guys, but I respect their choices, because everything they did so far was good). Everyone else I have on Facebook for example. 6 of us exposed ourselves here and tbh, it's easy thing to do once you have nothing to hide. Truth is that you just can't succeed without real "investors" (people outside your community who follow your work and "invest" in it). No matter how good are your intentions.

P.S. Btw the % of a currency you hold does not matter if you don't measure it in Bitcoin or fiat (i.e. you are looking at your coin only) and you are using it properly.

Pleasure to meet you too.

Cheers,
Spartak