increasing the dev fund will lead to another bearish alt season for ZEC.
did you come to this idea by yourself? or someone from the ECC told you, and then they will say “the community came up with the idea”, like in the previous halving?
can you tell me why ECC deserve an increase?
because they started to work on a wallet after 7 years? (like before an election - to show progress)
or did they show good qualities when we had a 1 year bug in the system?
while i don’t think we should stop funding, i think manipulating the protocol to save ECC, isn’t good for sustainability. keep it 20% or it will be the final nail in our coffin.
question:
what if the price increases to 500$ in 2025? they still deserve 40% of all coins mined?
honestly they had millions of coins over the years, the community is not here to pay for their management mistakes… maybe if ECC goes away isn’t the worse thing for Zcash after all? we still have The Foundation and the transition to Zebra.
Zcash is about privacy, not about ECC drama and saving them from bankruptcy every halving
Constructive to ZEC holders are things that will make the coin price go up. Hint: its not marketing ZEC as private fiat and its not inflationary issuance with no end in sight.
The choices are pretty simple if you want ZEC to go up given the current coin price.
Cut overhead and spend 90% on development. This will help orgs focus.
Implement a transition plan to move away from inflationary issuance. Since coin supply is fixed at 21m, there is one choice. Implement transaction fees or turn to a community development model (like Bitcoin and others). This will help build trust.
Consolidate resources and work as a team. Too much in fighting over centralized funding model. Prioritize core blockchain projects that will increase transaction volumes. The most common sense one is privacy based stablecoins. The Foundation then doesn’t need to hedge off chain. They can keep the currency on chain with a Zstableoin. Keeping transactions on the Zcash blockchain is value added development.
Create an ecosystem and fee structure where third parties can fund their own development on top of the Zcash blockchain. I find it highly hypocritical that developers wont work for free; when they dont want to implement a structure for customers to pay. ZEC holders will not subsize the project forever. So what’s the plan? It needs to be implemented now. Your solution to use inflationary growth is not constructive and will kill ZEC and the project.
Create a crowdsourcing platform for people to directly fund community projects from zec holders. The dev fund should be for development. Community crowdsourcing for community projects like education and local advertising.
With the right vision for privacy based coins, the above, in my opinion, will help to establish a floor in the price of ZEC. More issuance, more spending on a misguided projects and marketing, and focusing on privacy only (and not utility or stability) will continue to increase risk of ZEC ownership.
the dev fund isn’t for anyone’s personal piggy bank. for some reason i would not be at all surprised if you sympathized with the below.
FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried believed in utilitarianism and thought rules against lying or stealing inhibited his ability to maximize the greatest benefit for the most people, his former girlfriend and co-worker testified Wednesday at his federal fraud trial.
“He didn’t think rules like ‘don’t lie’ or ‘don’t steal’ fit into that framework,” Caroline Ellison, Bankman-Fried’s on-again, off-again girlfriend, said.
If you want to use zec as a tool to advance your ideology, it’s a cancer. hopefully, as crypto evolves the people making decision are held to a high standard because as a zec holder we are buying with the belief the ECC and the Foundstion are acting in our best interest to make the price go up.
if everyone believed like you do, i would have to say zec is a fraud. but im pretty sure (not 100%) you are in the minority
we already cut the deal with ECC and Foundation. they need to restructure right size their organizations. they need to look inward and not look to take from anyone else. if you really think zec is money, issuing more coins or changing someone’s allocation is a form of theft. inflation is theft. it’s why people don’t trust government. it’s a hidden tax.
they need to give people trust
they won’t increase the 21m supply
they won’t reduce security by taking from miners.
they are in a box now because of wasteful spending. the supply curve and allocation to the org are designed to protect zec holders from wasteful spending. to enforce at least some budgeting discipline. the way forward is to build trust. the most important element of money is trust. it doesn’t build trust when you only care about taxing people and not making the money as represented in zec increase in price.
Reset the vision and mission. privacey for all (that means stablecoins and whatever people want to use) and for decentralized community development.
A fee/gas structure designed to free developers from submitting grants and centralized decision making could unlock unlimited development. the powers that be need to make it easier for third parties to build and profit based on transaction fees. there is no other way to charge customers. gas is a fee! zcash is doomed to failure without a gas/fee transaction based model.
a community crowdsource platform like monero to fund special projects. it’s time to reach out to the community at large and take the burden off zec holders.
I know what a fraud is. Have quite a lot of experience in finding and vetting frauds. Not my purpose here. My goal is to see ZEC do well. The pillar is not magic for my recommendations, its charging customers for the transactions they use (not hiding the cost of transactions in issuance) and community crowdsourcing (everyone chips in), bitcoin like devotion as other projects have (not a sole reliance on paid developers) and decentralized development (developers directly charge their own fees, in additional to ZEC TXN costs, for products they create with no middle men. The market decides the fairness of the fees, not a centralized organization). If ZEC is not generating transactions its probably because they are targeting the wrong customers. The magic is on your side believing the price of ZEC will magically increase (you admit you don’t even care if the price goes up, which your plan is sure to put downward pressure on). We are in this bind because of the price. ZEC holders are the backbone of the project. Price is everything, it’s our only barometer of what people think of ZEC and the vision set forth by the leadership at the moment. Targeting poor people with a highly volatile coin and telling them its cash is not very logical in my mind.
i misspoke, i should have said anyone who believes in an issuance strategy believes the prices will magically go up.
you did in fact say you don’t care if the price goes up or not l…
that’s the difference between our proposed solutions. my solution is geared towards making zec a viable ecosystem, so the price has a foundation to increase in price. yours is about shilling zec get money for your “more inspiring things”
i care about the price of zec going up. that’s my top priory. and it can be done if the ecosystem is managed responsibly.
now you want to bring up character. that’s a good one. let’s talk about character.
Who is the one trying to change the deal cut between the organizations and zec holders? First, we already have an agreement and now that the zec price is low largely because of wasteful spending, giving away core technology (likely one of your inspiring things!), and bloated overheard structures, you want change the existing agreement. Maybe you should care
more about zec holders. The zec price matters. Second, we have a proposal, which i presume you agree with due to your silence, to take money from the miners and change the deal with miners as well.
your solutions are only about what you can take from others (zec holders) and change a pre existing agreement. you admit issuance is theft as well and try to say if we get “consensus” somehow that makes it ok. it’s not ok. it would be a major breach of trust to change the 21m cap. Your name is befitting because your character is like your name: Jelly. Character is sticking to the agreements you make.
as a zec holder, you do have a deal. we are operating under that agreement. you are tying to change it.
you are the one that brought up character, not me. so i have a right to defend myself and my ideas like you.
i am defending and it you who are on offense. i’m happy for the issuance to stay the same. you are the one trying to offensively change an existing agreement. you are the bully tying to take advantage of zec holders and dilute them. i’m trying to protect and defend zec holders
How will Zstablecoins be regulated? The issue of control matters and you seem to overlook it. If you look at what’s going on with FTX, Binance, Tornado Cash, Apple, … , hardware wallet support for shielded ZEC, the real issue is control. Let’s start there before talking about a fee markets.
Why do you think the ZF is leaving the US?
Why do you think Coinbase is moving operations out the US?
and you should start a charity instead of hijacking zec to advance your ideology. zec is supposed to be private bitcoin. it’s you who is trying to gain a position of power inside zcash to get access to money and control its direction. it’s been a failure so far. and now that the price is down. something you should have cared more about. you need more money and these proposals are popping up to change issuance and the split with miners. stick to the deal and start developing for the benefit of zec holders
i’m not pretending. it it was my way or the highway, i would have sold because it’s clearly not my way. you leave people like me with only one option and that’s to sell.
exactly. so let’s stop talking about changing the issuance and existing deal, start restructuring the org cost structure. the focus more on building. develop develop develop. i’m 100% for developers!