[ANN] [MINT] Mintcoin (POS / 5%) [NO ICO] [Fair distro, community maintained]

[DougB62]

Are you serious?

DO NOT CHANGE THE COIN!!!!

1. The high number of coins is irrelevant...More is actually better because it gives the the coin liquidity.  70,000,000,000 is good don't change it.
2. The current interest rate needs to be high somewhat high at first and is a good thing especially in the early years. POS is how the coin is secured, and so if the POS reward is not high enough, it will not incentivise people to hold their wallets open and do POS minting actively, so the security of the coin relies on this. Do not change this!
3. The coin cap is needed to make the coin rare, so keep it. Once the cap is reached only transaction fees will remain going to the POS minters, and if you are concerned about it becoming too expensive, the only change that we will ever have to do is lower the transaction fee form time to time.


Do not change the parameters! The parameters are what makes Mintcoin uniquely Mintcoin. Changing them would be making an entirely different coin.

I am not quite sure how to get this across to the Mintcoin community... There is no 70b max coins limit in existence right now.  Please read through the code.

I get it... there is nothing in the code to halt staking after 70B coins have been produced - i.e., runaway inflation.

How hard would it be to implement this feature? (At whatever level should be chosen as a market cap - say 20B)

If it were implemented, wouldn't it defeat the final ~1.5% interest to replace "lost" supply?

Wouldn't halting any interest dissuade investment? I know it seems like a positive aspect to me, as long as it isn't hyper-inflationary.

Or am I completely missing your point?

[1714810536]

1714810536

[1714810536]

1714810536

[1714810536]

1714810536

[1714810536]

1714810536

[mgburks77]

I thought there wasn't going to be a hard fork, now you guys are talking about changes that require a hard fork

[DougB62]

1. The high number of coins is not irrelevant. It's one of the first things any real potential investor looks at.
2. By your very argument, the high interest rate has not in fact incentivised people, this is reflected in the current price of the coin.
3. What makes the coin more rare is having less of it, not more. That's the very definition of rare - less of.

Banks are giving less than 2.4% for 72 month CDs. If our POS rate was 10% - 12% you're saying that's not attractive enough to attract some investment money? I think it is more than adequate.

• Lowering the number of coins would only influence the unit price per per coin, not the market cap. Market cap is where the real value is. The number of coins has no bearing on the market capitalization. If you somehow were to divide the total amount of coins in existence in half, the market cap would be the exact same.
• The high interest rate IS incentivising people..Mintcoin has a high active minting participation rate over 63% currently, and growing. This is good for security.
• You can't create value out of nothing. Value comes from many places...such as the mathematical value in the protocol itself, utility of the coin. etc.

Good point on market cap - 500 tons of gold is worth 500 tons of gold, no matter how thinly you slice it.

[acceptance2]

1. The high number of coins is not irrelevant. It's one of the first things any real potential investor looks at.
2. By your very argument, the high interest rate has not in fact incentivised people, this is reflected in the current price of the coin.
3. What makes the coin more rare is having less of it, not more. That's the very definition of rare - less of.

Banks are giving less than 2.4% for 72 month CDs. If our POS rate was 10% - 12% you're saying that's not attractive enough to attract some investment money? I think it is more than adequate.

• Lowering the number of coins would only influence the unit price per per coin, not the market cap. Market cap is where the real value is. The number of coins has no bearing on the market capitalization. If you somehow were to divide the total amount of coins in existence in half, the market cap would be the exact same.
• The high interest rate IS incentivising people..Mintcoin has a high active minting participation rate over 63% currently, and growing. This is good for security.
• You can't create value out of nothing. Value comes from many places...such as the mathematical value in the protocol itself, utility of the coin. etc.

The number of coins has a very real effect on market cap when it prevents investors from coming on board. So by default, it has a very real indirect effect on market cap.

The unit price per coin can actually have a very real effect on market participants. Take Bitcoin for example. Once it hit the $100 level, the amount of participation among both media and participants increased dramatically. The majority of people would rather pay MORE for something than LESS. It's why early adopters always stand alone - the masses always come later. Price plays a very important psychological role - don't kid yourself.

[coolbeans94]

Are you serious?

DO NOT CHANGE THE COIN!!!!

1. The high number of coins is irrelevant...More is actually better because it gives the the coin liquidity.  70,000,000,000 is good don't change it.
2. The current interest rate needs to be high somewhat high at first and is a good thing especially in the early years. POS is how the coin is secured, and so if the POS reward is not high enough, it will not incentivise people to hold their wallets open and do POS minting actively, so the security of the coin relies on this. Do not change this!
3. The coin cap is needed to make the coin rare, so keep it. Once the cap is reached only transaction fees will remain going to the POS minters, and if you are concerned about it becoming too expensive, the only change that we will ever have to do is lower the transaction fee form time to time.


Do not change the parameters! The parameters are what makes Mintcoin uniquely Mintcoin. Changing them would be making an entirely different coin.

I am not quite sure how to get this across to the Mintcoin community... There is no 70b max coins limit in existence right now.  Please read through the code.

But should we continue on the path we're on there will effectively be 70 Billion issued over time correct?

Well, according to presstab, Mintcoin is similar to Peercoin in that it will have no cap, but will have limited increase in the money supply with a minting reward of ~5% per year indefinitely...which given the current POS participation rate of ~63% would be an increase in the money supply of about 3.2% per year every year forever. What this means is if you continue to be an active long-term minter, you would gain 5% per year in new coins, while the total money supply increased by 3.2% per year, putting you ahead by 1.8% every year. (5%-3.2%)=1.8%

[acceptance2]

1. The high number of coins is not irrelevant. It's one of the first things any real potential investor looks at.
2. By your very argument, the high interest rate has not in fact incentivised people, this is reflected in the current price of the coin.
3. What makes the coin more rare is having less of it, not more. That's the very definition of rare - less of.

Banks are giving less than 2.4% for 72 month CDs. If our POS rate was 10% - 12% you're saying that's not attractive enough to attract some investment money? I think it is more than adequate.

• Lowering the number of coins would only influence the unit price per per coin, not the market cap. Market cap is where the real value is. The number of coins has no bearing on the market capitalization. If you somehow were to divide the total amount of coins in existence in half, the market cap would be the exact same.
• The high interest rate IS incentivising people..Mintcoin has a high active minting participation rate over 63% currently, and growing. This is good for security.
• You can't create value out of nothing. Value comes from many places...such as the mathematical value in the protocol itself, utility of the coin. etc.

Good point on market cap - 500 tons of gold is worth 500 tons of gold, no matter how thinly you slice it.

But if nobody wants it, it's effectively worthless.

[coolbeans94]

Are you serious?

DO NOT CHANGE THE COIN!!!!

1. The high number of coins is irrelevant...More is actually better because it gives the the coin liquidity.  70,000,000,000 is good don't change it.
2. The current interest rate needs to be high somewhat high at first and is a good thing especially in the early years. POS is how the coin is secured, and so if the POS reward is not high enough, it will not incentivise people to hold their wallets open and do POS minting actively, so the security of the coin relies on this. Do not change this!
3. The coin cap is needed to make the coin rare, so keep it. Once the cap is reached only transaction fees will remain going to the POS minters, and if you are concerned about it becoming too expensive, the only change that we will ever have to do is lower the transaction fee form time to time.


Do not change the parameters! The parameters are what makes Mintcoin uniquely Mintcoin. Changing them would be making an entirely different coin.

I am not quite sure how to get this across to the Mintcoin community... There is no 70b max coins limit in existence right now.  Please read through the code.

I get it... there is nothing in the code to halt staking after 70B coins have been produced - i.e., runaway inflation.

How hard would it be to implement this feature? (At whatever level should be chosen as a market cap - say 20B)

If it were implemented, wouldn't it defeat the final ~1.5% interest to replace "lost" supply?

Wouldn't halting any interest dissuade investment? I know it seems like a positive aspect to me, as long as it isn't hyper-inflationary.

Or am I completely missing your point?

People are confusing the term inflation and using the term inflation incorrectly.

An increase in the money supply is not inflation.

Inflation is when you have more money needed to buy a good or service. (this can happen if you have too much of an increase in the money supply). But increase in the money supply itself is not inflation. Inflation of the money supply is an increase in the money supply....but inflation itself is not an increase in the money supply, get the difference?


In all reality, what we all need to be concerned about is net real "devaluation". Devaluation only comes if you are not minting.

With Mintcoin active POS minters are rewarded currently 20% per year, but since only about 63% of coins are actively minting, the overall increase in the money supply is currently less than 13% per year. So if you are a minter, then you have nothing to worry about... you are actually gaining value by the difference which is 7% per year.  Right now, the only possible way that any of your money is being devalued is if you are not minting, and if that is the case your mintcoins are being devalued at less than 13% per year...and this will drop down to about 3.2% once we enter the 5% POS reward in a few years. If you are actively Minting your coins, you are gaining value of 7% overall right now.

[coolbeans94]

1. The high number of coins is not irrelevant. It's one of the first things any real potential investor looks at.
2. By your very argument, the high interest rate has not in fact incentivised people, this is reflected in the current price of the coin.
3. What makes the coin more rare is having less of it, not more. That's the very definition of rare - less of.

Banks are giving less than 2.4% for 72 month CDs. If our POS rate was 10% - 12% you're saying that's not attractive enough to attract some investment money? I think it is more than adequate.

• Lowering the number of coins would only influence the unit price per per coin, not the market cap. Market cap is where the real value is. The number of coins has no bearing on the market capitalization. If you somehow were to divide the total amount of coins in existence in half, the market cap would be the exact same.
• The high interest rate IS incentivising people..Mintcoin has a high active minting participation rate over 63% currently, and growing. This is good for security.
• You can't create value out of nothing. Value comes from many places...such as the mathematical value in the protocol itself, utility of the coin. etc.

The number of coins has a very real effect on market cap when it prevents investors from coming on board. So by default, it has a very real indirect effect on market cap.

The unit price per coin can actually have a very real effect on market participants. Take Bitcoin for example. Once it hit the $100 level, the amount of participation among both media and participants increased dramatically. The majority of people would rather pay MORE for something than LESS. It's why early adopters always stand alone - the masses always come later. Price plays a very important psychological role - don't kid yourself.

I understand what you are saying but it is purely psychological. And that can go both ways...Now bitcoin is running into the problem that nobody wants to pay $600 for 1 coin. It is psychologically too expensive...nobody wants a fraction of a coin. So in this sense Mintcoin is at an advantage, as it has much greater upward price scalability.
21,000,000 coins is not the reason Bitcoin has all it's value. Bitcoin has all it's value for reason outside of the quantity of coins. If all that gave a coin it's value was how few of them there are then try making a crypto that only gives out 10 coins max... it will be worthless unless you can use it. A max of 10 coins does not have enough divisible units to make is liquid enough to be practical for use in exchange for goods or services, so it will be a worthless coin, no value. The fact that Mintcoin actually has a lot of units makes it more valuable because it gives greater opportunity for upward scalability. The fact that some "investors" out there, whoever they are, don't understand the value in coin liquidity yet, it is their problem. Look long-term, not just at what will pump the price short-term. Real actual value comes from a stable useable coin, not "just" rarity. If it is too rare, nobody can use it as a medium of exchange.

[coolbeans94]

I am not quite sure how to get this across to the Mintcoin community... There is no 70b max coins limit in existence right now.  Please read through the code.

So what will currently happen once 70b coins is reached? Just continue minting at 5% rate?

Yep.

If this is true, then it might actually be a good thing. As the actual increase in the total money supply will really be much less than 5% (like about 3.2%) and then you have your problem of lost coins and deflationary problems solved. If this is true, then Mintcoin might be perfect just the way it is and may never need to be tinkered with at all. The transaction fee would not need to be adjusted lower as frequently, if ever. Only time will tell. I say that for now, just leave the coin the way it is, and maybe a few years into the 5% rate check back and see if any tinkering may be needed. But don't be in a rush to change stuff, as this is the architecture of the coin itself. Mintcoin is really a solid coin, even if some investors don't realize it yet.

[acceptance2]

1. The high number of coins is not irrelevant. It's one of the first things any real potential investor looks at.
2. By your very argument, the high interest rate has not in fact incentivised people, this is reflected in the current price of the coin.
3. What makes the coin more rare is having less of it, not more. That's the very definition of rare - less of.

Banks are giving less than 2.4% for 72 month CDs. If our POS rate was 10% - 12% you're saying that's not attractive enough to attract some investment money? I think it is more than adequate.

• Lowering the number of coins would only influence the unit price per per coin, not the market cap. Market cap is where the real value is. The number of coins has no bearing on the market capitalization. If you somehow were to divide the total amount of coins in existence in half, the market cap would be the exact same.
• The high interest rate IS incentivising people..Mintcoin has a high active minting participation rate over 63% currently, and growing. This is good for security.
• You can't create value out of nothing. Value comes from many places...such as the mathematical value in the protocol itself, utility of the coin. etc.

The number of coins has a very real effect on market cap when it prevents investors from coming on board. So by default, it has a very real indirect effect on market cap.

The unit price per coin can actually have a very real effect on market participants. Take Bitcoin for example. Once it hit the $100 level, the amount of participation among both media and participants increased dramatically. The majority of people would rather pay MORE for something than LESS. It's why early adopters always stand alone - the masses always come later. Price plays a very important psychological role - don't kid yourself.

I understand what you are saying but it is purely psychological. And that can go both ways...Now bitcoin is running into the problem that nobody wants to pay $600 for 1 coin. It is psychologically too expensive...nobody wants a fraction of a coin. So in this sense Mintcoin is at an advantage, as it has much greater upward price scalability.
21,000,000 coins is not the reason Bitcoin has all it's value. Bitcoin has all it's value for reason outside of the quantity of coins. If all that gave a coin it's value was how few of them there are then try making a crypto that only gives out 10 coins max... it will be worthless unless you can use it. A max of 10 coins does not have enough divisible units to make is liquid enough to be practical for use in exchange for goods or services, so it will be a worthless coin, no value. The fact that Mintcoin actually has a lot of units makes it more valuable because it gives greater opportunity for upward scalability. The fact that some "investors" out there, whoever they are, don't understand the value in coin liquidity yet, it is their problem. Look long-term, not just at what will pump the price short-term. Real actual value comes from a stable useable coin, not "just" rarity. If it is too rare, nobody can use it as a medium of exchange.

The coin is on life support. Surely you're not suggesting the path we're on has served us well?

[coolbeans94]

The coin is on life support. Surely you're not suggesting the path we're on has served us well?

All I am arguing is that the coin's architecture is not the problem. I think the coin is fine,  not on life support. Overall, all cryptos are generally in a slump at the moment. Give it time, concentrate on actually developing the features utility and usibility of the coin...android wallet...merchants, etc. Bitcoin didn't reach $600 the first year. Have realistic expectations.

[acceptance2]

I am not quite sure how to get this across to the Mintcoin community... There is no 70b max coins limit in existence right now.  Please read through the code.

So what will currently happen once 70b coins is reached? Just continue minting at 5% rate?

Yep.

If this is true, then it might actually be a good thing. As the actual increase in the total money supply will really be much less than 5% (like about 3.2%) and then you have your problem of lost coins and deflationary problems solved. If this is true, then Mintcoin might be perfect just the way it is and may never need to be tinkered with at all. The transaction fee would not need to be adjusted lower as frequently, if ever. Only time will tell. I say that for now, just leave the coin the way it is, and maybe a few years into the 5% rate check back and see if any tinkering may be needed. But don't be in a rush to change stuff, as this is the architecture of the coin itself. Mintcoin is really a solid coin, even if some investors don't realize it yet.

I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. Just to be clear.

But the facts are, the coin doesn't really trade anywhere, nor is it used anywhere. Collecting interest on a worthless coin is not worth...anything. Under a $1000 a day in trade volume will not keep the coin alive.

So the coin is effectively dead. Jump starting it with some change seems to me to be the only possible means to try and revitalize the coin. Welcoming new investors, from within the alt community and out.

Not making any changes at this point will be the death knell for the coin. Sure we may still all own it and we may be collecting our 20% interest, but at .00000001 would there be any point?

And ultimately, it would fall into very few hands, meaning no real network security if that is a legitimate issue.

[kiklo]

MintCoin FINAL POS was supposed to be 5%.

That is why I purchased a few million.

If the community lowers the POS to 1.5%.

Then it would make more sense to CASH OUT of MintCoin completely and invest in a Utility Stock paying ~ 5%.

The Final Rate has to be at least 5% otherwise there is no reason to Hold it when there are other coins with even higher rates of interest and they are pennies apiece.

Just so you know what a lot of US are thinking.

[acceptance2]

MintCoin FINAL POS was supposed to be 5%.

That is why I purchased a few million.

If the community lowers the POS to 1.5%.

Then it would make more sense to CASH OUT of MintCoin completely and invest in a Utility Stock paying ~ 5%.

The Final Rate has to be at least 5% otherwise there is no reason to Hold it when there are other coins with even higher rates of interest and they are pennies apiece.

Just so you know what a lot of US are thinking.

A lot of you? With 5 posts? Try again.

[bottlenecks]

static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 70000000000 * COIN;   // 70 bil

https://github.com/mintcoinproject/mintcoin/blob/master/src/main.h#L35

    // Raise the price as the block approaches full
    if (nBlockSize != 1 && nNewBlockSize >= MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN/2)
    {
        if (nNewBlockSize >= MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN)
            return MAX_MONEY;
        nMinFee *= MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN / (MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN - nNewBlockSize);
    }

    if (!MoneyRange(nMinFee))
        nMinFee = MAX_MONEY;
    return nMinFee;
}

https://github.com/mintcoinproject/mintcoin/blob/b24be6bc99b006957e15dfe090615eec130301d6/src/main.cpp#L522

How about that?

[Beaverslayer]

Hello all. I'm stepping out of my stealth mode to give my 2Mintcoin opinion on this.

The 70 billion cap will not be reached for at least 40 years I'll most likely be dead by then, so it has never been a problem with me.

The current interest scheme is very reasonable and is the main reason I got into Mintcoin in the first place. Leave it the way it is.

The BIGGEST problem Mintcoin has always had, was the 700 MILLION Mintcoin Premine. This is the main reason the coin never took off. I truly believe that the Dev was always to tired and never wanted to improve the coin, because he was so busy trading 700 MILLION coins at 50 some exchanges. I can just imagine how much time and effort it took to accomplish that feat.

The most important thing to do with Mintcoin, is to start DEVELOPING features for the coin. Upgrade the wallet would be the first thing. I've said it before, and I'm going to say it again.... HAVE A LOOK AT SILKCOINS WALLET.....

Get the Android Wallet into use. This has gone on long enough. If Paspi can't complete it, find someone who can....simple as that...

I've also said it before, and again I'm going to say it again... Check into having Mintcoin included into http://keepod.org/ and have each one of their USB devices have 10,000 Mintcoins to start them off with. (This does need the Android Wallet)

All the other things you guys are talking about will require a HARD FORK and that is a VERY VERY VERY bad thing to do. Look at Saturncoin...they hard forked and reduced the total supply of coins, then exchanged 1000 old Saturncoins for 1 new Sat2 coin....that didn't work out to well for them did it?

Put together some sort of "Media Release" send it to ALL the big crypto news sites, explaining EXACTLY what happened with the original dev, and what is taking place now. Explain that the community is coming together (and has actually grown) since the dev left, and that you are developing all these new features for the coin.

I personally put a lot of time into Mintcoin from the beginning, and after reading a PM from the original dev (cryptomommy knows of this) I pretty much didn't want to be involved with him any longer, so I went into stealth mode. There was discussions months ago about having the community take over the coin (sort of a coup d etat) at that time I asked the people involved to hold off until I talked to the dev about things...at that time he was open to making changes, but he never really did anything, so the coup d etat was somewhat called off. Looking back (hindsight of course) I should have kept my mouth shut.

I still have reservations about a few things, but I do believe cryptomommy is doing a standup job. Everyone should really put some serious thought into the idea of changing the coin, and everyone should have a look at the Silkcoin wallet as well as the Keepod site.

Thanks for your time...back to stealth mode...

[coolbeans94]

I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. Just to be clear.

But the facts are, the coin doesn't really trade anywhere, nor is it used anywhere. Collecting interest on a worthless coin is not worth...anything. Under a $1000 a day in trade volume will not keep the coin alive.

So the coin is effectively dead. Jump starting it with some change seems to me to be the only possible means to try and revitalize the coin. Welcoming new investors, from within the alt community and out.

Not making any changes at this point will be the death knell for the coin. Sure we may still all own it and we may be collecting our 20% interest, but at .00000001 would there be any point?

And ultimately, it would fall into very few hands, meaning no real network security if that is a legitimate issue.

I understand. Concerns about the volume being quite "low" compared to some other coins is legitimate. But that is not the end all, be all statistic. Volumes can be easily manipulated for one thing. The coin is not worthless. The fact is it's value has only very slowly dropped over time and on low volume. It is at about #50 in market cap despite all it has gone through shows it is resilient. Volume will increase once the trend reverses, as people chase returns, that is just how markets work.

[kiklo]

    
Re: [ANN][MINT] PoS Rewards and Market Cap Survey & Discussion
Today at 04:08:23 AM
   
Reply with quote  #16472
Quote from: kiklo on Today at 01:38:06 AM
MintCoin FINAL POS was supposed to be 5%.

That is why I purchased a few million.

If the community lowers the POS to 1.5%.

Then it would make more sense to CASH OUT of MintCoin completely and invest in a Utility Stock paying ~ 5%.

The Final Rate has to be at least 5% otherwise there is no reason to Hold it when there are other coins with even higher rates of interest and they are pennies apiece.

Just so you know what a lot of US are thinking.

A lot of you? With 5 posts? Try again.


5 Post or 5000 Posts does not matter.
Drop the POS below 5% and destroy the Coin

 

[Beaverslayer]

MintCoin FINAL POS was supposed to be 5%.

That is why I purchased a few million.

If the community lowers the POS to 1.5%.

Then it would make more sense to CASH OUT of MintCoin completely and invest in a Utility Stock paying ~ 5%.

The Final Rate has to be at least 5% otherwise there is no reason to Hold it when there are other coins with even higher rates of interest and they are pennies apiece.

Just so you know what a lot of US are thinking.

A lot of you? With 5 posts? Try again.

The number of posts a person has is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Mintcoin has picked up a fair amount of new users in the last few months, and new users are just starting to get into the discussion. Berating new users because of their post count really puts a VERY VERY bad light on Mintcoin, and this should stop immediately.

This is now a "Community Coin" and each and every one in this community has every right to express their opinion regarding the changes being proposed to Mintcoin. We should be discussing this rationally and without malice towards anyone.

[DougB62]

The number of posts a person has is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Mintcoin has picked up a fair amount of new users in the last few months, and new users are just starting to get into the discussion. Berating new users because of their post count really puts a VERY VERY bad light on Mintcoin, and this should stop immediately.

This is now a "Community Coin" and each and every one in this community has every right to express their opinion regarding the changes being proposed to Mintcoin. We should be discussing this rationally and without malice towards anyone.

+1, and welcome back.