People accepted Zcash based on guidelines they laid out. That would be the “community” that uses ZCash, including me. 99% of the people could be in favor of more funding, it does not change the fact they are back tracking on stated guidelines that THEY created at the start.
Im just raising a point, this opens a door later on for more things(even more funding). Why am I the bad guy for questioning them changing mining rewards. I honestly dont mine Zcash anymore, so I dont care that much what they do. I just think its another underhanded move done by Zcash that will make miners lose even more faith.
Am I? My point is, will the funding vote by the “community” (if there is one) be the same sham(as you say it was) as the ANTI-ASIC vote the “community” made. AKA did not effect the decision.
I fell like, you guys made plans and needed 10% of the coins to complete it, wasnt that enough?
I dont know what your plans are after the rewards run out, it might be a good idea for you guys to release some information on what you plan to do, so we are not caught by surprise. If/When funding suddenly stops. This is a important topic for any company, im sure there has already been talks about it.
As a company they should of managed the funds better. If you ask for X amount of money to deliver said product, and than end up needing more half-way through, you must of made poor financial decisions, whether it be not asking for enough at the start, or spending too much of what you had.
Companys would of killed to have investors spend even a couple million investing into new tech 10 years ago. Amazon had to find 22 people to invest 50k each to get a million to start Amazon. With 2.1 million coins, you think Zcash would be off to a great start no?