[ANN][OC] Orangecoin ★★ POS ★★ Anon Transactions ★★ Masternodes

[fonzerrellie]

Sorry for my ignorance of MN, few questions.

What happens if someone doesn't want to be a MN any more, do they get the original 2000 back with any gains, or is that 2000 gone? What is the 'exit' procedure? We'd be able to sell the nodes themselves to each other like on ebay if necessary.

Also, what's the required amount of time (like contract?) needed for a MN?

good questions

deserves some more votes

don't forget about the new poloniex vote if you haven't already, it's just a one time vote so you don't need to keep running back every hour

[Specialkey]

Buy volume drops . Two-Three weak hands could take  us down to the ground.  

It is time for a clear concept or a multipool.

[Jim_Rambler]

Sorry for my ignorance of MN, few questions.

What happens if someone doesn't want to be a MN any more, do they get the original 2000 back with any gains, or is that 2000 gone? What is the 'exit' procedure? We'd be able to sell the nodes themselves to each other like on ebay if necessary.

Also, what's the required amount of time (like contract?) needed for a MN?

Funny you ask because I was in the middle getting ready to post this info. I saw the word "contract" and thought it a good time to explain a few things more.

Ok the very rough steps on how you set one up.

- Get a machine with a static ip (Amazon or Digital ocean or other server platform)
- Setup firewall rules (close all ports except 9999)
- Make sure only port 9999 is Open
- Download the daemon
- Use getaccountaddress 0 to get an address on that daemon
- Send EXACTLY 2000 OC to that daemon
- Encrypt the wallet with a strong password, make a backup of the wallet, do not copy the wallet while the daemon is running
- In the conf file add "connect=xxxxxxxx" and "masternode=1"
- Restart the daemon
- masternode start `head -1` (type your password on the next line)

Once your set up the masternode start `head -1` is what locks  your 2000 OC and makes them available for Anon transactions. Also makes the wallet address made by getaccountaddress 0 eligible for reward payouts.

The 2000 OC will be locked and unable to be spent, However if you want to spent them and Stop the masternode its a simple as a Stop command

I'm working on you being able to spent the reward earnings out of the wallet address with out stopping the masternode, More to follow on that.

This was just a rough example and is not the final or may not be the exact way to set the Masternode up, however you guys need to see that you contral when your 2000 OC are and are not Masternodes.  

[cryptoba]

It has been a great discussion time  

I can't wait for the new structure  and the great Masternodes  

A lot of new investors are watching closely and if things work out OC will have a very bright future.

[btcMagnet]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

[Jim_Rambler]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

[btcMagnet]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

contracts are made by such indirect methods all the time, not the point

Here is the point:
If that $100,000 plus figure above doesn't bother you, than you are planning on personally having a few MNs.  Which might influence your fair judgement here.

I'm just an investor trying to keep the price for this service within this solar system.

[cryptoba]

What happened to the anon announcement on 7th of june.

Hi,  the specifications for Masternodes are being discussed.

The Devs decided to share their thoughts whith the community, before implementing any new specifications.

[Jim_Rambler]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

contracts are made by such indirect methods all the time, not the point

Here is the point:
If that $100,000 plus figure above doesn't bother you, than you are planning on personally having a few MNs.  Which might influence your fair judgement here.

I'm just an investor trying to keep the price for this service within this solar system.

I'm not sure which numbers your using, or why you have picked 15%

I personly expressed the 10% would probably be best.

But where ever the $100,000 came from, knowing that you used the 15% model then we also know that PoS rewards our 6.67 times more then MN so. $667,000 paid to ppl to just have there coins sitting in their open wallets. I mean your looking at rewards as we are paying for services, which isn't a bad thing but then we must also look at PoS as a service we pay for. And in a 15% model we will be paying PoS 6.67x the MN and in a 10% model we will be paying PoS 10x more.

[btcMagnet]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

contracts are made by such indirect methods all the time, not the point

Here is the point:
If that $100,000 plus figure above doesn't bother you, than you are planning on personally having a few MNs.  Which might influence your fair judgement here.

I'm just an investor trying to keep the price for this service within this solar system.

I'm not sure which numbers your using, or why you have picked 15%

I personly expressed the 10% would probably be best.

But where ever the $100,000 came from, knowing that you used the 15% model then we also know that PoS rewards our 6.67 times more then MN so. $667,000 paid to ppl to just have there coins sitting in their open wallets. I mean your looking at rewards as we are paying for services, which isn't a bad thing but then we must also look at PoS as a service we pay for. And in a 15% model we will be paying PoS 6.67x the MN and in a 10% model we will be paying PoS 10x more.

10% still gets into a 6 figure price tag for the service even with moderate gains, the 100k is conservative based on half the current price of black.

It's some what off the issue but since you brought it up:
these proposed reward coins, and minted coins, have almost opposite effects on holder equity.

Minted coins are first party creations, all going to current coin holder proportionately, having no effect on investment equity, provided you mint.

These reward coins (coming prematurely into the orange universe) will dilute not only coin number and value, but holder equity.

anon is certainly worth paying for, and we should pay well,
ppl should line up to get in,
but when they start getting into fist fights, we are overpaying.

[Jim_Rambler]

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

Just saw this when re-reading.. I couldn't agree more!!!!! there will soon be a realization by the mass that fiat has become super inflated. It will most likely be when, people have taken so much money out of the bank to convert it to crypto that the bank dosen't really have the real money to pay the rest of the ppl. I mean could you image what would happen if everyone today just decided to go take their money out of the bank and change it over to crypto? The bank would run out of money in hours!!!! This will raise the value of crypto to the say USD bc it will take more and more of it to buy just 1 BTC. I really feel the $10k coin is coming, hope soon

[Rainer4256]

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

Just saw this when re-reading.. I couldn't agree more!!!!! there will soon be a realization by the mass that fiat has become super inflated. It will most likely be when, people have taken so much money out of the bank to convert it to crypto that the bank dosen't really have the real money to pay the rest of the ppl. I mean could you image what would happen if everyone today just decided to go take their money out of the bank and change it over to crypto? The bank would run out of money in hours!!!! This will raise the value of crypto to the say USD bc it will take more and more of it to buy just 1 BTC. I really feel the $10k coin is coming, hope soon

It only takes 5% of fiat withdrawals from banks to crash them. The sooner the better. Long live cryptos (especially OC of course)!

[btcMagnet]

maybe we are doing this the hard way
maybe we can install a market discovery system in the software

suppose we just charge by transaction (we have to pay for it somewhere you know).
We provide the MN clients with a bid line and maybe even a visual cue (to see other MN bids)

with bids specifying:
 
minimum trans charge and
% rate for trans over the minimum.

wallets could be programmed to use the lowest priced available MN.
trans traffic could be rerouted (to pay more) if availability problems arise
anxious senders could offer tips for faster service

In others words try to create conditions that allow free trade for this service, as oppose to trying to dictate parameters, which btw never works.

and we leave everything else as is.

[or maybe something like this that nails the real market,
we are getting nowhere trying to guess at it prices years from now,
hell we don't even know what it's worth today yet.
we are trail blazing here, and i think we need a whole new map]

[Jim_Rambler]

anon is certainly worth paying for, and we should pay well,
ppl should line up to get in,
but when they start getting into fist fights, we are overpaying.

We must first start with the fact that if the 2000 OC would sit in and open wallet for this first year, and it stakes every 14 days it will stack 24.3 times and would earn 386 OC.

So we must know that ppl will open masternodes all over the place right up til they all will make less the 386 per year, bc if they make less then PoS then its just better to keep it in an open wallet. (I'm taking out he cost of the server about $60 per year, it's easier to calculate so just know these numbers are rough) So if ppl take 2000 OC out of their PoS wallet and move them to a masternode where they earn say 400 OC a year. All this is doing is shifting coin out of the PoS and over to Masternodes, with a small intensive to do so. However to have it all the way down to 400 OC per MN, OC would have to be $4.28 per coin to offset the $60 from the extra 14 OC. So looking at todays price per coin
$0.003057 to get that $60 for server cost each MN needs to make an extra 19,627 OC to pay for the server. So for the masternodes to break even compared to the PoS for that 2000 OC each one needs 20,013 OC divide that by the 1,000,000 OC (10%) reward and that only allows for 49 MN. Now that is at the price today, as the OC price raises  so will the amount of MN able to come online. Because the value of each coin raises, so the amount of OC needed to offset the $60 lowers and opens the door for the reward to be spread out thinner.

We set the numbers and it well all run as it should based on the coins value, that's they way it needs to be.



Edit: This was only for numbers, lets not for get that amazon give you a free year, so there will be enough coin reward for way more then just 49 MN the first year.

[Halofire]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

contracts are made by such indirect methods all the time, not the point

Here is the point:
If that $100,000 plus figure above doesn't bother you, than you are planning on personally having a few MNs.  Which might influence your fair judgement here.

I'm just an investor trying to keep the price for this service within this solar system.

I'm not sure which numbers your using, or why you have picked 15%

I personly expressed the 10% would probably be best.

But where ever the $100,000 came from, knowing that you used the 15% model then we also know that PoS rewards our 6.67 times more then MN so. $667,000 paid to ppl to just have there coins sitting in their open wallets. I mean your looking at rewards as we are paying for services, which isn't a bad thing but then we must also look at PoS as a service we pay for. And in a 15% model we will be paying PoS 6.67x the MN and in a 10% model we will be paying PoS 10x more.

10% still gets into a 6 figure price tag for the service even with moderate gains, the 100k is conservative based on half the current price of black.

It's some what off the issue but since you brought it up:
these proposed reward coins, and minted coins, have almost opposite effects on holder equity.

Minted coins are first party creations, all going to current coin holder proportionately, having no effect on investment equity, provided you mint.

These reward coins (coming prematurely into the orange universe) will dilute not only coin number and value, but holder equity.

anon is certainly worth paying for, and we should pay well,
ppl should line up to get in,
but when they start getting into fist fights, we are overpaying.

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN is negligable and is the only drawback considering the other options we can chose from, 10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with.  Our other options accelerate OC way up into its price curve, there's no room for further price growth for decades.

[Jim_Rambler]

the number of nodes is not important, 10 was a for instance.
We are trying to discover and fix a total monthly/yearly cost for this method of achieving anon.
This cost should be measured in some amount that can be appreciated (and understood) by the investors.

The 15% plan does not offer this, it promises fixed amounts in OC currency for the next 39 years, while we are all clueless as to what OC will be worth next week.

the question is in 3 parts:

1. how much a month/year do we want to pay for this service

regardless of how many MNs, we need to define X:
$1200/month?
2 btc/month?
1 oz gold/month?
125000 OC/month?

if we make it OC (as in the 15% plan) we lose control of the true equity associated with this figure because compared to the other three OC is an infant.  If OC rises to only half the fame of cousin black we (holders of orange) would be paying over $100,000 a year for this particular method of achieving anon service.

2. in what measure or currency do we contract to pay (with OC at the base of this payment)

i think it has to USD or btc.
OC doesn't work (unless we offer a new price frequently, see below), it's in multi-parley mode, see no. 1 above

3. and for how long do we make these contracts

well the more stable the 'currency of measure (no. 2)' the longer we could guess at what will be reasonable,

historically the dollar is by far the most stable, but going down,
and btc has a bright future, going up
both on the move over a schedule measured in years (which the 15% plan is trying to fix today).

so i think we should offer a new price every month, maybe if we updated that frequently we could even offer and pay directly in OC

btw i think the $ is shit and will turn to zero very soon and suddenly, but this is not relevant to anything else im saying

There is no contract, I'm not sure where the Contract idea came from, it is no more a contract, then pointing your miner at a mining pool. The only difference is your not mining with randomly bought hardware, your using Orangecoins that must be bought from Orangecoin holders.

And the payout will be in Orangecoin this will drive the value of an Orangecoin up because it's part of the core value output when calculating ROI of the masternode

And like Halofire said try and look at it more like we are charging MN start ups not paying for them.

contracts are made by such indirect methods all the time, not the point

Here is the point:
If that $100,000 plus figure above doesn't bother you, than you are planning on personally having a few MNs.  Which might influence your fair judgement here.

I'm just an investor trying to keep the price for this service within this solar system.

I'm not sure which numbers your using, or why you have picked 15%

I personly expressed the 10% would probably be best.

But where ever the $100,000 came from, knowing that you used the 15% model then we also know that PoS rewards our 6.67 times more then MN so. $667,000 paid to ppl to just have there coins sitting in their open wallets. I mean your looking at rewards as we are paying for services, which isn't a bad thing but then we must also look at PoS as a service we pay for. And in a 15% model we will be paying PoS 6.67x the MN and in a 10% model we will be paying PoS 10x more.

10% still gets into a 6 figure price tag for the service even with moderate gains, the 100k is conservative based on half the current price of black.

It's some what off the issue but since you brought it up:
these proposed reward coins, and minted coins, have almost opposite effects on holder equity.

Minted coins are first party creations, all going to current coin holder proportionately, having no effect on investment equity, provided you mint.

These reward coins (coming prematurely into the orange universe) will dilute not only coin number and value, but holder equity.

anon is certainly worth paying for, and we should pay well,
ppl should line up to get in,
but when they start getting into fist fights, we are overpaying.

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN is negligable and is the only drawback considering the other options we can chose from, 10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with.  Our other options accelerate OC way up into its price curve, there's no room for further price growth for decades.

I agree!!! Thank you

[Halofire]

I will add I have no solution for the 2000 OC 'problem' except I'll chime in: stop basing it off anything else but BTC, LTC or stablized cryptos that will have a projected price growth the same or close to OC.

Forget gold. Forget fiat. Metals will retain some value as they have their place in industry, but not as store of wealth. Fiat will be recycled into toilet paper. 

[btcMagnet]

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN is negligable and is the only drawback considering the other options we can chose from, 10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with.  Our other options accelerate OC way up into its price curve, there's no room for further price growth for decades.

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN won't be negligible if we are paying 6 figures a month for 40-45 years.  That is my point, it is this absurd price tag for this nominal service that i object to.  

It's only common sense, these coins won't be falling from heaven, investors must take a loss somewhere on the books for every orange paid-out.  Why are we even considering paying 10 times or more what this service is worth?

"10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with."

So i guess you must either question the math behind the projected 6 figure yearly price for anon by this method, or you accept it as a tolerable expense.  I'm just wondering which one?

[Jim_Rambler]

First off thank you all for the input!!! It's been a long 4 days and many great points have been brought up.

After many numbers have been crunched it looks like the great majority of us, are happy with 10% of the PoS reward amount being added to a Masternode reward payout. Also it looks to be majority of us are happy with that amount coming off the length of reward handouts, leaving PoS the way it is. So based on 4 days and 11 pages of post, this is what the new model would look like.


yr1  PoS  20%   MN 2%
yr2  PoS  10%   MN 1%
yr3  PoS    5%   MN 0.5%
Flat  PoS  2.5%  MN 0.25%
For a total of 41 years

[Halofire]

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN is negligable and is the only drawback considering the other options we can chose from, 10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with.  Our other options accelerate OC way up into its price curve, there's no room for further price growth for decades.

The dilution from ending PoS earlier to pay the MN won't be negligible if we are paying 6 figures a month.  That is my point, it is this absurd price tag for this nominal service that i object to. 

It's only common sense, these coins won't be falling from heaven, investors must take a loss somewhere on the books for every orange paid-out.  Why are we even considering paying 10 times or more what this service is worth?

"10% of the cap over 40-45 years is not bad to deal with."

So i guess you must either question the math behind the projected 6 figure yearly price for anon by this method, or you accept it as a tolerable expense.  I'm just wondering which one?

6 figure projected, yes. It's worth all the nodes we can afford with that, not paying out gobs to a few nodes. Six figures may not be realized...
Keep in mind:
The actual payout will be less for PoS, not everyone stakes, not all coins stake which leads to next point.
The actual payout will be less for MN, the chain moves slower in between stakes. blocks aren't issued as fast, MN get paid less