Ah, by "burning" I was referring to specifically the act of spending coins to an unreachable address, therefore removing them from circulation. There are a number of coins that use this type of coin burning for various purposes.
Paying fees for blockchain messages has always been part of Florincoin. There is a fee-per-byte calculation (derived from Bitcoin's fee calculation). Transactions with filled tx-comment fields are mostly >700 bytes which results in a miner's fee.
Yes, but this only benefits miners, who don't care about Flo or it's value. They will just dump any Flo they get back on the market. So, use of Alexandria would ironically just result in more sell pressure for Flo. I have seen this mechanism work out poorly for the value / price of other coins long term.
Are there any mechanisms by which Flo would increase in value? Could those fees go to burning those instead? Not sure why you would pay those to miners instead of Flo holders (by burning or some other mechanism). If you did this it would increase the value of Flo tremendously from at least a theoretical perspective.
Just remove them from supply by having them all go to a burn address is the easy answer here.
Appreciate the discussion.
Hi, thanks for your questions, they reveal a deep understanding of what a coin needs for longevity and market value - I'm anxious to share a wiki soon about how Alexandria addresses this issue, hopefully by the end of the week. In the meanwhile, I'll summarize our approach as such:
publishing content requires spending a fee. the fee is calculated differently depending on if its a piece of commercial content or a piece of free content. if its free, the fee is based entirely on the size of the data being added to the blockchain, as @metacoin said previously. if its commercial, the fee is calculated as a function of the price being asked for it.
the fees go to miners, yes. and most miners sell their coins at their earliest opportunity, also agreed, tho we think they'll be have differently in our system, but ill get to that in a sec. first - lets consider that the fees also have to come
from somewhere, and we know full-well that independent publishers (artists of any kind) are not about to become cryptocurrency traders in order to purchase an altcoin, after becoming first familiar with Bitcoin and signing up for a hosted wallet and uploading their drivers license, all just to publish their song or video. to address this - well, the first step in addressing this was integrating Coinbase's Buy Widget (
https://developers.coinbase.com/docs/buy-widget) to give them a super easy way to buy $1-$5 of BTC with a debit card without even making a coinbase account, but we did all that on the application layer.
the primary thing we did to address this at the protocol layer, while also giving miners more incentive to mine Flo (since we ultimately want a competitive and rising mining market in order to trust the consistency and resiliency of the consensus system those publishers are relying on), is that we define within our protocol a system that lets publishers automatically exchange their BTC into the amount of FLO they need to publish their piece of content, from the miners directly, at a reasonable margin on top of their estimated costs. this is a first come first served system, using the timestamped data in the blockchain itself to determine which coins are up next for trading, which results in miners having an actual incentive to hodl their coins - but not just to hold while watching a crypto market for the price to hit a target, to hold until the market of publishers gets to you in line, and if you wait until then, they'll pay you a reasonable 10-20% margin on top of what you spent to mine them.
and then, of course, since a few minutes after the publisher trades BTC for those FLO, they are then spent as the tx-fee for their publish message, the miners have not just an incentive to hold the coins they have mined, but to keep on mining cuz they might just win not just the standard block reward, but a bonus every once in a while as well - and if they hold them until their turn to be autotraded, they'll again make a margin on them.
Result is a generally stable but also upward impact on hashing power as long as there is an overall increase in publishing activity - as more miners discover that they can
set it and forget it and get reliable returns from pointing their sCrypt miners at a pool compatible with our protocol, the number of open offers from those miners will increase, in other words the time between when they mined a block and when they sold that block will get longer - but as overall publishing activity goes up, that number of offers will go down proportionately.
Coincidentally (well, partially by design) this should have a generally stable but also generally upward impact on token price as well. Some miners will be anxious to sell immediately and thus they will apply pressure to the crypto markets to drive the price higher - whenever hype about the project leads to traders newly discovering it and getting excited about it, the price will surge accordingly, which would cause some of the miners who were holding until a publisher traded for their coins to instead go trade them on the open market, reducing the available supply for publishers, and shortening the time between when miners win blocks and when they sell them.
Hopefully that gives you a decent understanding of our approach - please let me know if that leaves you with more questions than it answers
