[XMR] Moderated Monero General Discussion Thread

[rpietila]

Just willing to restate my points:
- No, I am not advocating changing the total number of coins;
- No, I am not advocating higher inflation;
- Yes, I am advocating that inflation is more evenly spread over time;
- Reason I do this is that fully mined coins have a hard time finding buyers if there are growing coins also available (don't be confused with pumps - that's something that cannot happen with XMR anyway anymore).

Reading my posts in this short thread might be enjoyable and insightful.

How in the world could we ever get enough people on the same page to promote any change to coin release schedule or total emission? 

MEW is the place where it will be discussed. So that we can make sure if the coin owners actually prefer this or that.

The ones who do not believe in the viability of one of the choices, are likely selling their coins anyway. So it's better that a good project continues with the majority (instead of the minority), which also makes us hopeful that a great number (instead of a small number) of new ones will join, leading to increased (instead of decreased) adoption, compared to current situation.

Which side is the majority, I don't yet know. I - as well as many hopefully - has not locked in his own opinion yet.

[rdnkjdi]

Just willing to restate my points:
- No, I am not advocating changing the total number of coins;
- No, I am not advocating higher inflation;
- Yes, I am advocating that inflation is more evenly spread over time;
- Reason I do this is that fully mined coins have a hard time finding buyers if there are growing coins also available (don't be confused with pumps - that's something that cannot happen with XMR anyway anymore).

Reading my posts in this short thread might be enjoyable and insightful.

How in the world could we ever get enough people on the same page to promote any change to coin release schedule or total emission? 

MEW is the place where it will be discussed. So that we can make sure if the coin owners actually prefer this or that.

The ones who do not believe in the viability of one of the choices, are likely selling their coins anyway. So it's better that a good project continues with the majority (instead of the minority), which also makes us hopeful that a great number (instead of a small number) of new ones will join, leading to increased (instead of decreased) adoption, compared to current situation.

Which side is the majority, I don't yet know. I - as well as many hopefully - has not locked in his own opinion yet.

Any idea what % of coin owners MEW is?  I'd like to be involved - if at least to observe so I suppose I'll join.  Not much of a good ole boys club participant but I'd like to know sooner rather than later the direction the coin decides to take.

[Anon136]

How much monero do mew members have to have?

[nakaone]

the relation between changing emission and funding development is not totally clear to me - xmr needs ONE thing and that is funded development. - mew can work out a proper inflation after the coin is almost full mined.

- this coin fills the only existing niche
- it has a great development team
- it has a great and overall smart community, which is quite big
- it does NOT have a great codebase as well as userfriendliness
- it does have at least funding issues

from a scientific perspective I am very interested if we get a proper funding managed

[rpietila]

Any idea what % of coin owners MEW is?  I'd like to be involved - if at least to observe so I suppose I'll join.  Not much of a good ole boys club participant but I'd like to know sooner rather than later the direction the coin decides to take.

It has 6,200 votes, so nominally 620,000 coins (about 20%).

Personally I believe people have on average "underbought" votes to save money and disguise their total holding. The MEW membership's share of the current emission is likely 30-40%.

[rpietila]

How much monero do mew members have to have?

10 XMR is the minimum fee. This nominally corresponds to 1000 XMR holdings, although you can be much smaller or bigger if you like.

[David Latapie]

Flat emission curve may also work, who knows?

So far, I only know flat emission curve, this is TEKcoin. I draw no conclusion in one way or another neither do I imply anything.

[NewLiberty]

Just willing to restate my points:
- No, I am not advocating changing the total number of coins;
- No, I am not advocating higher inflation;
- Yes, I am advocating that inflation is more evenly spread over time;
- Reason I do this is that fully mined coins have a hard time finding buyers if there are growing coins also available (don't be confused with pumps - that's something that cannot happen with XMR anyway anymore).

Reading my posts in this short thread might be enjoyable and insightful.

Would this have the effect then, if it were an stock, of a reverse-split?

Whereas each whole coin would become some fraction of a coin, along with an emission change to a longer tail?
Whereas the same proportionate value of the whole market cap owned by the same wallets.

It would be difficult to see how this would harm any holders.

My other issue remains however, do it once, do it right.
And, I don't know what right is in this instance.  I also don't think that anyone else does at this time, or at least I have seen nothing yet.
So far it is just picking straws from a cup with other experiments using an arbitrary selection, there are no reasons behind any of them other than XYZ did it so it must be good.
Maybe I'm just not authoritarian enough to see the merit of that reason.

Our block chain has some senses, I am hopeful they can learn from the environment around it.
At the same time there may be merits in keeping it blind and deaf to what it carries if that is what it takes to maintain all of its other merits.

So I don't know the answer, not yet.

[Kuriso]

Without GUI, adoption will remain sluggish. With sluggish adoption, not only will price be pressured, but more importantly - and this is a coin killer - the emission will run its course to the point that XMR will considered to be a "community premine" despite all our good heroic efforts.

Since changing the emission also can be considered to be a premine of sorts, we are between a rock and a hard place with (yet) no solutions that would have the unanimous support of everybody.

I can also be wrong concerning the future perception of "community premine".

It will take more than a GUI wallet to increase adoption.  You need tools that allow companies to use your coin in real business scenarios.  You need a way for those companies to get out of monero and into fiat so they can pay employees, taxes, cost of goods sold, etc...  There's an entire host of things that are needed to make this possible and they MUST be easy to use.  The only thing a monero GUI will be good for right now is a reason to pump the price.  That's it.

Besides tools (any coin can do this), I think the key to long term adoption will be a stable market value.  Wild price swings and uncertain markets will only keep real companies from investing long term in a coin and reduce the number of them willing to accept it as payment.  I think this is the problem with litecoin.  At it's high, ltc was like $45+/- and now its 4.50+/-.  Its 1/10th the price of the all time high.  Bitcoin on the other hand has seen 1/3-1/2 of its all time high in this same time period.  Had the GOX fiasco not happened, we probably would not of seen this much of a decline. 

Where the heck is this "community premine" coming from.  I've never seen this term used.  I understand what you're saying when you say it but why?  Who has claimed that monero is "community premine"?  I think you are putting a label on something that does not exist to help push your agenda.

1st year is 39%, after 4 years it is 86%.

I would much rather see us at <50% for 3-4 years, because a fully mined coin when there is no meaningful adoption (10s of millions of users at least) is likely to be superseded by a fork of the same, which is perceived as "more legitimate" since it is "not premined".

I don't think inflation is "good" but I find it hard to retain legitimacy in the view of the future generations without it. Crypto is not gold. Gold cannot be forked, crypto can. And has. And will.

Flat emission curve may also work, who knows?

I doubt Monero will ever see "10s of millions of users at least" but in an attempt to not crush your dreams, if monero were to see 10s of millions of users, inflation would be good.  With a max supply of around 18 million coins, that leaves very few coins to be had for a lot of people.  Especially considering that you own such a large %.  I guess with 10s of millions of users you can be considered a "community premine".

For long term support and growth of the coin, a reversal of the emission curve would be a better option.  If monero's user base was to expand, it would benefit the community and late adopters to have more coins available later in the game than earlier.  I do find it a bit funny how many of you consider DRK to be a 'shitcoin' or a 'instamined scam' yet you also like to use it for comparisons.  You should do your own thing.  Do something different.

I'll use generic numbers here to make my point easier.
So let's say we have 500 users now and 10 coins per block.  1 year from now we have 1000 users and 5 coins per block.  Earlier adopters "community premined" monero and those that come to the community later are getting the "short end of the stick".  A fairer emissions curve would be to have 5 coins per block now and 10 coins per block later.  The only benefit of a decrease in coins over time is it rewards early adopters.  With a decrease in emissions over time you are not supporting an increase in users.  You are not encouraging the community to grow.  You are actually supporting a decrease in users.  Why do you think most altcoins do this?  After the initial influx of users and the traditional pump and dump, many users leave and very few new users join.  A decrease in emissions relates to this trend.  If you truly believe monero's user base will increase, you should consider increasing emissions with the increase of the user base.

Reversing the emissions curve could help to even out the market over time if adoption increase.  If adoption does not increase, the price could fall with the increase in emissions.  I guess the question here is, how much do you believe in the coin and the increase in adoption?

[nioc]

The only benefit of a decrease in coins over time is it rewards early adopters.  With a decrease in emissions over time you are not supporting an increase in users.  You are not encouraging the community to grow.  You are actually supporting a decrease in users.  Why do you think most altcoins do this?  After the initial influx of users and the traditional pump and dump, many users leave and very few new users join.  A decrease in emissions relates to this trend.  If you truly believe monero's user base will increase, you should consider increasing emissions with the increase of the user base.

Reversing the emissions curve could help to even out the market over time if adoption increase.  If adoption does not increase, the price could fall with the increase in emissions.  I guess the question here is, how much do you believe in the coin and the increase in adoption?

I know you as one who doesn't drink koolaid.  You make some interesting points.

As to the bolded, I believe the a big reason most coins use this type of emissions curve is because btc does.  As far as benefiting early adopters, that was the point with btc as it was the first of it's kind and an incentive was needed to jump start the process.  I guess it is not needed to the same degree for that purpose now for new "real" coins. 

But how to change from where we are...............................................................

[Kuriso]

The only benefit of a decrease in coins over time is it rewards early adopters.  With a decrease in emissions over time you are not supporting an increase in users.  You are not encouraging the community to grow.  You are actually supporting a decrease in users.  Why do you think most altcoins do this?  After the initial influx of users and the traditional pump and dump, many users leave and very few new users join.  A decrease in emissions relates to this trend.  If you truly believe monero's user base will increase, you should consider increasing emissions with the increase of the user base.

Reversing the emissions curve could help to even out the market over time if adoption increase.  If adoption does not increase, the price could fall with the increase in emissions.  I guess the question here is, how much do you believe in the coin and the increase in adoption?

I know you as one who doesn't drink koolaid.  You make some interesting points.

As to the bolded, I believe the a big reason most coins use this type of emissions curve is because btc does.  As far as benefiting early adopters, that was the point with btc as it was the first of it's kind and an incentive was needed to jump start the process.  I guess it is not needed to the same degree for that purpose now for new "real" coins. 

But how to change from where we are...............................................................

Yes you are correct about the curve for Bitcoin but it is not quite the same deal when comparing it with an altcoin.  If they are worried about being labeled as a 'community premine', they should really fix it.  I think i might of used the term emission curve in several places but I think I should of used a different term.  I've been sick and my head isnt on right lol but I think you'll get the point.  I may make an update in the morning.  Im going to bed.  Wanted to see MP v2 but now I'm tired of waiting on them to get their shit together.

[sleepdog]

From the quiescence of this thread, in contrast to the rapid growth of the free-for-all thread, I feel forced to conclude that people are idiots.

Personally I was just hoping that this thread would be used for updates on development and general news about Monero, instead of tedious and often off-topic back and forth about politics and economics...  But I guess the official site may be a better source for that.

It's good not to have to wade through chest height troll droppings anyway.

[wachtwoord]

How much monero do mew members have to have?

10 XMR is the minimum fee. This nominally corresponds to 1000 XMR holdings, although you can be much smaller or bigger if you like.

Can you direct me to the thread so I can read without joining? I read only version is fine as well.

[smooth]

A few comments to clarify my earlier remarks about the funding question.

I've made the point that the current and past situation with a very small amount of voluntary donations is unsustainable, and it is, but some have interpreted that to mean there is immediate funding crisis, which is not the case. The core team is still covering the costs of the project out of our own resources and we are still volunteering a large amount of our time to work on the project.

All of the work we are capable of doing right now is being done. More immediate funding wouldn't get new people up to speed faster or even bring in more people (we are already in the process of adding two programmers right now).

"Unsustainable" means we do need to evolve the model otherwise we hit a dead end at some point, but that is likely months away, not days or weeks. Organizational improvements such as the creation of the MEW, some crowdfunding initiatives, etc. to be finalized over the next few weeks will probably push that back even more. My goal in even bringing up the topic was and is to ensure that the project is on sound financial footing before that crisis occurs, not to spark panic.

Also this should not be taken as lack of appreciation for those who have donated, nor to discourage MEW memberships or direct donations, because every little bit is definitely appreciated and does help.

I hope this helps clear up any misunderstandings.

[binaryFate]

I don't know how close the GUI is from being functional. (Missive soon?).
But I think a beta version should be released as soon as possible. Even if not all detail features are there, even if the texts and traductions are not perfect.

And this, even if the database is not ready.
For a long time I thought the GUI was pointless when the DB was not ready, I think this was and is maybe still the consensus. But I changed my mind, mainly because of the time passed already, and therefore the possible accusations of "community mine" that will only keep growing. We are still seen as "as fair as possible", but not for a long time ahead.

Let's say so far Monero is for highly techy people. With the GUI (and without the DB), it can reach out to mildly techy people. We should not wait to have everything polished, all components like the DB ready, available to the low techy people, to release it.

If an official GUI is released as "Beta", or even "Alpha", and you need 4 or 6GB or RAM to run it, it's perfectly fine as long as requirements are clear. But we could already expand the user base to the mildly techies, and counter all possible accusations.

It can send and receive transactions? If yes, that is enough to release it. The only drawback is the possible required support to provide to users, but again, if it's clearly advertised as "Beta" or "Alpha", it's not much of a problem. The community at large can also handle support, not only the devs behind the GUI.

Sidenote, for the same reason I think the website should be updated. At this point it might be better to improve it incrementally rather than wait for perfection of completion of everything to release it.

In general I know there is a lot of work done by the core team, I am grateful to them. With all due respect, however, I think Monero needs some visible and tangible stuff to be released asap, and surely there are some stuff for which it's feasible in their current beta state.

[rpietila]

How much monero do mew members have to have?

10 XMR is the minimum fee. This nominally corresponds to 1000 XMR holdings, although you can be much smaller or bigger if you like.

Can you direct me to the thread so I can read without joining? I read only version is fine as well.

MEW ANN.

[smooth]

(Missive soon?).

Missive is planned for Monday so probably better to take up these issues again after that.

[rpietila]

Like smooth above, I also lived some time in confusion regarding the imminent development funding crisis. Since we have now got MEW communication tools up and running, the hearing today was very reassuring. There is no funding crisis. No significant extra funds could not even be committed right now, since the bottleneck in development is not money but qualified developers, and I am happy to say that we are in the forefront regarding this already, with more in the pipeline.   My proposal of a 20,000 XMR fundraiser was actually turned down! It is waiting for the time when it is needed.

MEW membership fees have already contributed 3,000+ XMR to the development, and this sum is expected to increase when MEW shows its usefulness and also in preparation for important votes coming later this year. Votepower is based on the amount contributed.

The future looks bright, especially considering that in USD terms, Moneros are now in 40% discount compared to as little as 1 month ago, and even in BTC terms, they are 25% cheaper.

[binaryFate]

(Missive soon?).

Missive is planned for Monday so probably better to take up these issues again after that.

Ok, sure. Good to hear it's coming

[wachtwoord]

How much monero do mew members have to have?

10 XMR is the minimum fee. This nominally corresponds to 1000 XMR holdings, although you can be much smaller or bigger if you like.

Can you direct me to the thread so I can read without joining? I read only version is fine as well.

MEW ANN.

Thanks! I didn't get that was the thread with the actual content, sorry.