[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[Dahaa]

wtf are you talking about? I am not eth user...or any other coin. for me it's all about the $$$ that's all. I just gave an example between those 2 coins that's all. who gives a f.ck about scale and fees?  nobody cares bro, it's about the profit that's all. I don't buy coins to use them, I invest to make a profit over time and this coin can't do that. simple as that.  btw....I have some dash in my portfolio, it is in my best interest to see this coin succeed and go in top 10 again but I am sure that this will not happen again anytime soon....if ever!

Well, i can give you examples of other coins :

Dash  

ATH : $1,642.22
Price : $68.40
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,83%

Bitcoin Cash

ATH : $4,329.52
Price : $215.08
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,03%

Ripple

ATH : $3.84
Price : $0.232
Percentage Down from ATH : 93,95%

NEM

ATH : $2.09
Price : $0.107
Percentage Down from ATH : 94,88%

IOTA

ATH : $5.69
Price : $0.237
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,86%

ZCASH

ATH : $953.34
Price : $52.82
Percentage Down from ATH : 94,47%%

Source : messari.io

Lets face it, your example sucks as it reeks of prejudice (only Dash is doing sooo baddd) and your talk about who needs fees and scalability kinda sucks too :

Ethereum High Fee
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5277445.0

Ethereum fees are crazy...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276820.0

Etherum Fees Double In a Week As DeFi Heats Up
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276964.0

I'm scared of ethereum gas fee
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276992.0

ETH's fees on "De-Fi" platforms are ridiculously high
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5273624.0  


I am just glad Dash does not have these kind of heavy issues about fees and scalability.

Cкoлькo cтoит dash 1bch, нo нe cкoлькo cтoит dash 1bsv? Pacиcтcкий oтвeт?

Even BSV is almost 3 times more expensive than shit called dash

Now you also start with BSV as comperison???

Now tell us the reasons why BSV is so "expensive", is it because of their technology, is it because of a solid working team??.
I am curious about your statements

What's the difference what the reason is? For everyone, the main thing is income, not how it turned out. Is not it? Your friend remembered bch and forgot bsv

[Dahaa]

wtf are you talking about? I am not eth user...or any other coin. for me it's all about the $$$ that's all. I just gave an example between those 2 coins that's all. who gives a f.ck about scale and fees?  nobody cares bro, it's about the profit that's all. I don't buy coins to use them, I invest to make a profit over time and this coin can't do that. simple as that.  btw....I have some dash in my portfolio, it is in my best interest to see this coin succeed and go in top 10 again but I am sure that this will not happen again anytime soon....if ever!

Well, i can give you examples of other coins :

Dash  

ATH : $1,642.22
Price : $68.40
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,83%

Bitcoin Cash

ATH : $4,329.52
Price : $215.08
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,03%

Ripple

ATH : $3.84
Price : $0.232
Percentage Down from ATH : 93,95%

NEM

ATH : $2.09
Price : $0.107
Percentage Down from ATH : 94,88%

IOTA

ATH : $5.69
Price : $0.237
Percentage Down from ATH : 95,86%

ZCASH

ATH : $953.34
Price : $52.82
Percentage Down from ATH : 94,47%%

Source : messari.io

Lets face it, your example sucks as it reeks of prejudice (only Dash is doing sooo baddd) and your talk about who needs fees and scalability kinda sucks too :

Ethereum High Fee
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5277445.0

Ethereum fees are crazy...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276820.0

Etherum Fees Double In a Week As DeFi Heats Up
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276964.0

I'm scared of ethereum gas fee
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276992.0

ETH's fees on "De-Fi" platforms are ridiculously high
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5273624.0  


I am just glad Dash does not have these kind of heavy issues about fees and scalability.

Cкoлькo cтoит dash 1bch, нo нe cкoлькo cтoит dash 1bsv? Pacиcтcкий oтвeт?

Even BSV is almost 3 times more expensive than shit called dash

Now you also start with BSV as comperison???

Now tell us the reasons why BSV is so "expensive", is it because of their technology, is it because of a solid working team??.
I am curious about your statements

What's the difference what the reason is? For everyone, the main thing is income, not how it turned out. Is not it? Your friend remembered bch and forgot bsv

You constantly remember some technologies, but for some reason you are silent about the fact that everyone has forgotten about you and is not mentioned anywhere. Is not it?

[NibiruHybrid]

What is Dash Drive? | Dash Platform #2

Please subscribe and click the notification bell 🔔 for future updates and to receive a notification when new episodes are published. The remaining videos in this series will be uploaded to the channel on a weekly basis.

😃 Thank you for watching, please like and share this video! 👍

Watch - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14N5pnl5W0Y

[toknormal]

Dash conifer not able to push below 0.006 on the raiche, despite trying extremely hard. Could be a sticker after multiple retests holding.

Even more "stickiness" could be achieved by recovering the mining reward which has gone to waste in paying for the most expensive network of nodes on the planet despite them delivering no net measurable value to end users nor investors. This has resulted in USD$ based masternode ROI being trashed to the floor by investors once capital losses are summed with nominal gains measured in Dash.

You can see why the model attracts the "scam" label: If you sell someone a tonne of sand on the basis of a promise of them growing their sand holding, but then you just increase the grain count instead of the weight - you gonna get some people complaining 'bout that.

The way to resolve this is to restore the proportion of the supply that's exposed to competitive mining (the definition of "scarcity" in the commercial sector which Dash exists and is trying to compete).

That way we might relieve ourselves of the catastrophic weight of masternode costs that's suffocating our marketcap and start reviving this coin back to health and competitivity.

[WastedLTC]

Dash conifer not able to push below 0.006 on the raiche, despite trying extremely hard. Could be a sticker after multiple retests holding.

Even more "stickiness" could be achieved by recovering the mining reward which has gone to waste in paying for the most expensive network of nodes on the planet despite them delivering no net measurable value to end users nor investors. This has resulted in USD$ based masternode ROI being trashed to the floor by investors once capital losses are summed with nominal gains measured in Dash.

You can see why the model attracts the "scam" label: If you sell someone a tonne of sand on the basis of a promise of them growing their sand holding, but then you just increase the grain count instead of the weight - you gonna get some people complaining 'bout that.

The way to resolve this is to restore the proportion of the supply that's exposed to competitive mining (the definition of "scarcity" in the commercial sector which Dash exists and is trying to compete).

That way we might relieve ourselves of the catastrophic weight of masternode costs that's suffocating our marketcap and start reviving this coin back to health and competitivity.

Do your feelings change after Evolution is released and the masternodes become more utilized?

[toknormal]

Do your feelings change after Evolution is released and the masternodes become more utilized?

It's just like the economics of any other "product". If the masternodes are delivering a service that has value to the end user then that will change the whole game and the investment will start to be attractive. But if they're delivering a service that costs peanuts to run and charge (peanuts x 1000) for it then that business model isn't going to last very long. Nor is the coin going to be investible for store of value purposes if its "store of value" is based on delivering a service that's way overpriced.

So while there's so much margin in the node revenues (that investors end up paying for and get nothing in return) it should be directed to miners (because then at least investors get "coin"in return and will keep on investing). If "Evo" starts to be expensive to run and cost MN's more to host then there might be a case for directing more reward share to nodes if there's a lot of uptake (network traffic).

[spirits]

What's the difference what the reason is? For everyone, the main thing is income, not how it turned out. Is not it? Your friend remembered bch and forgot bsv

You constantly remember some technologies, but for some reason you are silent about the fact that everyone has forgotten about you and is not mentioned anywhere. Is not it?

I understand your reasoning and can understand it. Without it, any investment would be doomed to fail.
It remains to be seen whether this approach will always work. With every castle in the air, sooner or later the facade will fall. The top 50 are full of them.

Ultimately, it would only be nice if you left everyone to make their own investment decisions without constantly saying how stupid the others are.

[qwizzie]

Do your feelings change after Evolution is released and the masternodes become more utilized?

So while there's so much margin in the node revenues (that investors end up paying for and get nothing in return) it should be directed to miners (because then at least investors get "coin"in return and will keep on investing).

Why don't you start by donating your own masternode rewards to miners ? Show us the way, be our leading example of how things should be done.
Maybe all the masternode operators are just waiting on one masternode operator to lead the way  

Sorry, but having someone continuously bitch about masternode rewards needing to be redirected to miners, while that same person is actually a masternode operator
that does not even participate in the governance part (for some time now) and just collects his masternode rewards all these years, is beyond hypocrite in my eyes.  
That person is preaching one thing and doing the opposite.

[toknormal]

Why don't you start by donating your own masternode rewards to miners ? Show us the way, be our leading example of how things should be done.
Maybe all the masternode operators are just waiting on one masternode operator to lead the way  

sorry, but a masternode operator continuously bitching about masternode rewards needing to be redirected to miners, while that same masternode operator
does not participate in the governance part for some time now and just collects his masternode rewards all these years, is beyond hypocrite in my eyes.  

That's because you've never really understood the principle of what I'm arguing for or seen how it can boost masternode rewards in real terms by prioritising the protocol around preservation of the capital value rather than maximisation of (Dash denominated) revenue. You've always presented your case purely in terms of "supply growth" as denominated in Dash whereas this is irrelevant to most non-Dash holders who might be considering investing in it. What they're interested in is capital growth (measured in $USD, not Dash).

You seem to be advocating a "sell out or shut up" philosophy which is not really in the spirit of the governance principle by which the protocol is directed.

If something's wrong and failing, it's wrong and failing whether governance votes endorse it or not and it should be corrected

[qwizzie]

Why don't you start by donating your own masternode rewards to miners ? Show us the way, be our leading example of how things should be done.
Maybe all the masternode operators are just waiting on one masternode operator to lead the way  

sorry, but a masternode operator continuously bitching about masternode rewards needing to be redirected to miners, while that same masternode operator
does not participate in the governance part for some time now and just collects his masternode rewards all these years, is beyond hypocrite in my eyes.  

If something's wrong and failing, it's wrong and failing whether governance votes endorse it or not and it should be corrected

That is not how Dash governance works. We are not going to bypass our complete governance system, just so you can test your little market theory that so few people support.
You can advocate for this 'wrong and failing' with every post you make, but that override will simply never happen.

The only chance you have to achieve change is through the governance system, which means convincing masternode operators.
This is the wrong forum to achieve that.  

Which makes me wonder how serious you really are about all of this. In a way this forum is a good forum to just dump some opinion in without worrying too much about getting a backlash
from many masternode operators at once.  A backlash you most likely get if you would start a discussion about this on dash.org/forum or on Dashpay Reddit.
 

[toknormal]

That is not how Dash governance works. We are not going to bypass our complete governance system, just so you can test your little market theory that so few people support.

Well my "little market theory" would seem to have more voters from those that actually matter - which is market buyers and it isn't difficult to see why because they are getting increasingly screwed for value as we advocate for ever greater primary supply reward to be siphoned away from them and consolidated in the hands of existing holders.

Now nobody benefits - not even those holders - because the market simply keeps devaluing the exchange ratio accordingly to compensate
and will continue to do so. So feel free to keep up the mulish gatekeeping based on a single vote. It won't keep you safe or protect you from capital losses. The masternode network costs half a million dollars right now ever WEEK to run. If the coin value only gets to $200 the enormous masternode margin means that that cost  goes to £1.3 million a WEEK.

That is just bookkeeping facts and they're measurable by any potential investor who's looking for a return on their investment. They want to know where that money's going and how it feeds back to them in the form of a return.

In 100% mining, it's a no brainer - it comes directly back to them in the form of coin. They don't need to go through some brainf*k'd contortion to understand supply dynamics and how that "might" compensate for being short changed after financing the coin production. Maybe you should direct your energies to convincing them rather than me

[qwizzie]

That is not how Dash governance works. We are not going to bypass our complete governance system, just so you can test your little market theory that so few people support.

Well my "little market theory" would seem to have more voters from those that actually matter - which is market buyers and it isn't difficult to see why because they are getting increasingly screwed for value as we advocate for ever
greater primary supply reward to be siphoned away from them and consolidated in the hands of existing holders.

Now nobody benefits - not even those holders - because the market simply keeps devaluing the exchange ratio accordingly to compensate and will continue to do so.

Lets take a look at what those market buyers / sellers have been doing over the years :


Source : messari.io

Looking at the price performance, Dash does not particularly stand out between the Altcoins with regards to percentage down from ATH.
Specifically comparing Dash with Bitcoin Cash (which is our main competitor and also a proof of work project), there is actually very very little difference in negative price performance.

Dash : -95.82%
Bitcoin Cash : -95.06%

Please explain why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners) has such a similar negative price performance as Dash ? Should Bitcoin Cash not be doing a whole lot better then Dash according to your market theory ? After all, their miners receive 100% of the blockrewards....

[toknormal]

Please explain why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners) has such a similar negative price performance as Dash ? Should they not be doing a whole lot better then Dash according to your market theory ?

They should be doing a lot better than us in marketcap ranking (according to my theory) which they are and according to your theory, any capital value they have lost should be going to Dash, not other 100% mined coins. I think you might find that's not the case.

[qwizzie]

Please explain why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners) has such a similar negative price performance as Dash ? Should they not be doing a whole lot better then Dash according to your market theory ?

They should be doing a lot better than us in marketcap ranking (according to my theory) which they are and according to your theory, any capital value they have lost should be going to Dash, not other 100% mined coins. I think you might find that's not the case.

I am not talking about marketcap or marketcap ranking, i am talking about price performance.
Please answer the question, thank you.

If you can't answer that question, that simply means your market theory is pointless as it does not take into account price performance.
This price performance :

Dash : -95.82% down from ATH
Bitcoin Cash : -95.06% down from ATH

Marketcap = Supply x Price

[toknormal]

If you can't answer that question, that simply means your market theory is pointless as it does not take into account price performance.

No it doesn't it means that you're trying take ranking performance (which is a direct measurement of how competitive we are in terms of attracting investment compared to other coins) and turn it into an argument about price performance so you can cherry pick some arbitrary segment of a lame competitor's price history and use it to whitewash a genuine debate about masternode margins, how they are going to waste, depleting capital growth and how Dash ROI does not translate into $USD ROI without factoring in capital losses.

[qwizzie]

If you can't answer that question, that simply means your market theory is pointless as it does not take into account price performance.

No it doesn't it means that you're trying take ranking performance (which is a direct measurement of how competitive we are in terms of attracting investment compared to other coins) and turn it into an argument about price performance so you can cherry pick some arbitrary segment of a lame competitor's price history and use it to whitewash a genuine debate about masternode margins, how they are going to waste, depleting capital growth and how Dash ROI does not translate into $USD ROI without factoring in capital losses.

I will give you one last opportunity to answer why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners), has such a similar negative price performance as Dash.

Dash : -95.82% down from ATH
Bitcoin Cash : -95.06% down from ATH

It is really a very simple question.
Actually i have another very simple question for you : do you think investors will look at the price performance of a cryptocurrency they want to invest in ?

[toknormal]

I will give you one last opportunity to answer why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners), has such a similar negative price performance as Dash.

Because Bitcoin Cash faces competition from 100% mined coins - just as we do - and lost investment to them - just as we did.

So the more relevant question is therefore, if bitcoin cash still has all that hashrate that we apparently don't need, (a la "we don't need all this hashrate"), and on top of that "burden" has nowhere near our functional versatility, why did we not perform FAR BETTER than them ?

No need to answer. Potential investors have already asked that question and answered it for themselves before needing a reply from any of us. (You really do set the bar high with your comparisons b.t.w.)

[qwizzie]

I will give you one last opportunity to answer why Bitcoin Cash (where 100% of the blockrewards go to miners), has such a similar negative price performance as Dash.

Because Bitcoin Cash faces competition from 100% mined coins - just as we do - and lost capital to them - just as we did.

So the negative price performance has to do solely with the miners and the increased competition among 100% mined coins ?

And it is pure coincidence that other coins (not proof of work) have similar price percentage down from ATH like Dash (-95.82%) & Bitcoin Cash (-95.06%) ?  
Coins like IOTA (-95.57%) or NEM (-94.49%) or Stellar (-92.24%) or Ripple (-93.79%) ?

Link : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg55267388#msg55267388

Or maybe, just maybe there are other market forces at work that drove the price of all the Altcoins down, market forces like whales manipulating the Altcoins market.
Which means this could be totally unrelated to miners, rendering your market theory obsolete.

Any thoughts on that ?

[toknormal]

So the negative price performance has to do solely with the miners and the increased competition among 100% mined coins ?

That is one of the factors, yes (at least in the mined sector). Dash has been pushed out of the race because it doesn't give mining value for investment in hashrate. (Whether that investment comes from the miner themselves or the investors paying the miner for coin). It simply gets siphoned off and wasted. (Not returned to the investor in the form of a share in the coin supply the way it does with our 100% mined competitors).

The 7 most valuable mineables all have marketcaps over $2 billion at least except Monero which is around $1.6 Bn. Dash can barely muster half a billion.

Or maybe, just maybe there are other market forces at work that drove the price down, market forces like whales manipulating the Altcoin markets.
Which means this could be totally unrelated to miners. Any thoughts on that ?

That's an explanation I'd possibly use if I was preaching to the choir (as you do) or is there were no fundamental differences between Dash and its mined competitors. New investors are likely to see the elephant in the room before parting with their cash.

[qwizzie]

So the negative price performance has to do solely with the miners and the increased competition among 100% mined coins ?

The 7 most valuable mineables all have marketcaps over $2 billion at least except Monero which is around $1.6 Bn. Dash can barely muster half a billion.

Why do you think that is ? Why do you think Monero is at $1.6 Billion marketcap and Dash 'only' at $672 million marketcap ?