I was thinking about the sidechain for a while now...
It would be interesting to list Karmashares IPOCOS in some kind of system similar to Nxt or Bts.
Maybe proof of burn with a limited time frame will do the trick!
Or merge mining, crediting the already owners of karma with a fixed amount.
Proof of burn is a much better idea for the implementation of the side chain compared to merged mining which only benefits miners.
All we have proven while implementing the change to x11 is that traders (the pump on Cryptsy before the change to x11) have more of an impact than miners, which of course didn't create enough interest to stop the dump after the change. Miners are the cost of keeping cryptocurrencies secure, traders are the main people that buy and sell it. Humour miners, some of them are traders but don't forget their real value lies in their trading not their mining.
No no.. LLC coins are there to stay.
What if we offer two ways to invest now.
One : the regular way as it is now.
two : the proof of burn : where investors get x10 points or something when he invest by sending the coins to an address that is not accessible ??
This is a great idea. Karmashares LLC doesn't need more Karma, it needs the value of the Karma it has to be higher.
Lowering total number of coins is much better
I agree, but we tried that already ..
When we reintroduced the KARM/BTC trading pair it
became apparent that we were going to get stuck in
the 2-3-4 satoshi range ( ie the minimum 'tick' in satoshi
represents a huge percentage return ) ..
Who wouldn't buy @ 2sat and offer @ 3sat to make 50% returns ??
Kosmost saw the problem right away and suggested we reverse split the
coin to accomplish two things .. lower the total number of KARM to a
more reasonable level and get away from single digit satoshi pricing ..
The community was polled and it was decided not to pursue that change ..
Triff ..
this is because a reverse split has been shown not to work just look at Sat2
following a bad idea with another bad idea wont make things better.
fundamentally the core problem with any Altcoin or any other market for that matter is Supply v Demand.
Revers splitting does not address the issue of over Supply.. it only masks it.. and the risk is that by tampering too much with a coin you can reduce its demand. (some clear examples... VRC, SAT2, DRK etc etc)
likewise pricing Karm in lots of 1000 is likely to have no lasting effect on supply or demand.
the switch to X11 and updating the wallet, even though it does not affect supply, seems to have a short term positive effect on demand. This means that even people like me who do not agree with how the decision was made, can't really complain.
proof of burn has a direct effect on Supply but in order for it to be effective you would have to offer investors something that has more potential (and more risk) than Karma itself.
now some people would argue that PoS would be better than the existing Karm pow System.. and if they are willing to put their Karm on the line for that belief then nothing should stop them.
just as long as they don't put my Karm on the line for their belief if I don't agree with them.
Proof of burn is one way (but not the only way) that people who believe in these new projects can clearly demonstrate their support and commitment.
all of these new projects are fine as long as they don't destroy the value of the coins owned by the people who do not agree with them.
so far the Karmashares team has stuck to this principle and so they should be commended for taking a cautious approach to implementing new ideas.
I must be the only person who isn't complaining about the price of Karm but right now I think its pretty good... I remember being one of the few people willing to buy this coin back when it was 35 litoshi and look where we are now...
Triffen, the community was polled, the community voted strongly in favour of doing a reverse split it and it was decided not to pursue that change due to technical considerations. The way you wrote it implies the community didn't want the change. I was in favour of the reverse split however I'm strongly in favour of price per 1000. They are very different things but have similar benefits.
Changing Karma on BTC markets so it is price per 1,000 WILL increase demand and decrease supply and it will have a lasting effect. Not everyone values Karma based on its IPOCOs.
Imagine you are a large trader that only trades in Bitcoin. Karma is only worth what people are willing to pay for it. For example currently on Mintpal 7 BTC worth of Karma are voting Karma is worth less than 3 Satoshi, 1 BTC is voting it is worth more than 2 Satoshi. If you disagree with the 7 BTC people at 3 Satoshi, you now need somebody else to disagree more than you and buy out the 7 BTC people at 4 Satoshi before you can even consider selling. Nobody has bought at 3, why would you expect them to buy at 4 and why would those people expect somebody to buy at 5?
Supply is there because demand isn't due to the above.
The difference between Karma and SAT is that demand would never be there for SAT irrespective of any change, Karma will hit a price point where enough people believe in it that they will start to buy, however that needs to come before the people that read graphs write it off as a lemon.
You should care if the price is low now because it impacts chart readers value of Karma in the future.
Chargin.
