I agree. Regardless of how funding is implemented, we need to tightly coordinate the use of the resources we have. There is no room left for uncoordinated efforts.
7 Likes
, In my opinion this is likely the most important priority for the Zcash ecosystem at the moment.
6 Likes
Count me in. Now that weâre 4 full years into the tri-party system, the results speak for themselves. To answer the question - No there isnât a significant faction.
Cross Post:
The Primary, most Logical Reasons to End the Block Rewards Model is to make it imperative that the ZF & ECC reorient their currently exploitative behavior against ZEC holder/ activists.
How?
Stop giving those organizations free ZEC that they turn around and liquidate without regards to the Zcash project.
If the ZF & ECC intend to continue to work for Zcash, and operate as non-profits in America, then itâs time for them to stop acting like opaque crypto Hedge Funds/ trading into and out of arbitrary altcoins.
Are we âAll in Zcashâ or not?
2 Likes
This is not true where fiat doesnât have those properties. Thatâs precisely where ZEC is doing relatively well, and thatâs exactly the use case we should be supporting.
1 Like
I am in strong agreement with @decentralistdan and @earthrise. To some degree I believe we see the adaptive response they advocated coming from ZeBoot. I think that weâre going to start experiencing observable and very positive results as a consequence.
1 Like
It is absolutely true. Countries like Venezuala and those in Africa want stability too. You are not going to be able to replace Venezuala fiat with something equally as volaltile and prone to price declines. People in Africa use Mpesa, and NuBank is dominating is S. America. You are biting off more than you can chew. And you are the one speculating with development money.
ZEC price volatility is not price speculation, its historical statistical fact. Volatility is backwards looking whereas price speculation is forward looking. You are not going to be able to take the Vol out of ZEC under any scenario unless you plan on completely changing it by removing the 21m cap and collateralizing it, which happens to start looking like a stablecoin. If you think you will make ZEC stable and trustworthy such that a person will offer they labor in exchange for ZEC, I wish you would explain in detail. Then you can hopefully convince the Foundation to stop selling ZEC, which they need to do to hedge its price volatility. If ZEC was trustworthy as a SOV and stable, as a currency for day to day spending needs to be we would not be needing to hedge.
So you are speculating that the price will be become stable and more trustworthy because by all accounts ZEC is not a SOV or useable as a fiat for day to day spending today. Your own inherent ZEC price speculation is causing development funding speculationâŚ
So as it relates to development, you are the one speculating and gambling with development money provided by ZEC holders. Rather than trying to stop price speculation, we need to stop development funding speculation. Zcash has a good thing going; but your vision has caused a massive misallocation of resources. Now we have projects like Aleo that started ini 2019! looking to take over and displace Zcash. Recenty, they raised $200m (almost the entire ZEC market cap in one funding round!) and got a $1.45 billion value. There is a lot of competition and Zcash keeps getting smaller and smaller while the rest of the market is growing rapidly. Just because prices are down doesnt mean real user growth isnt happening. If ZEC is experiencing major user growth, transaction growth, wallet growth, etc etcâŚ, please share.
Aleo is a remarkable crypto wallet with several features that set it apart:
- Fully-Private Applications: Aleo is the first blockchain that enables fully-private applications. It achieves this through zero-knowledge (ZK) cryptography, which allows users to prove something is true without revealing how it is true. This privacy feature ensures that sensitive data remains confidential, making it an excellent choice for privacy-conscious users1.
- Proof of Succinct Work (PoSW): Aleo employs the PoSW consensus mechanism, which generates succinct proofs for transactions. This approach enhances scalability and efficiency while maintaining security1.
- Leo Programming Language: Aleo uses the Leo programming language, inspired by Rust. Leo is designed for writing private applications on the Aleo network. It allows developers to express logic easily and efficiently, contributing to the platformâs privacy-focused architecture12.
- Secure and Private Viewing: Aleoâs Leo Wallet provides complete privacy by allowing users to generate zero-knowledge proofs directly in their browsers. This innovative feature ensures secure and private viewing, sending, and receiving of tokens on the Aleo network3.
In summary, Aleoâs commitment to privacy, scalability, and cutting-edge technology makes it a strong contender for those seeking a crypto wallet that prioritizes confidentiality and security.
Sounds a lot like what Zcash was supposed to be in many waysâŚ
Now with crypto as a fiat, we can create collateral pools to create fiat alternative that will be much better than ZEC, Bitcoin, Monero and anything else without collateral and use the Zcash privacy network. That is why I have been a proponent of. However, Bitcoin seems to be positioning as âthe collteralâ or sit alongside the dollar and gold as a reserve currency (not a fiat for spending as a primary use case even though it can be spent). If they can build the trust between central bankers, they have a chance and the price clearly is a reflection of that potential. BTC price is still a fraction of the dollar value of gold, and that appears to be the primay use case. Fiat for spending requires stability and ZeBoot is just ZeSame if the plan is to try and get people to buy ZEC for spending on day to day transactions as a fiat. Its a risky gamble that keeps coming up snake eyes. We should ZeBoot with ZEC as a store of value as the primary use case, use the Zcash network for privacy transactions for a suite of assets such as stablecoins, and yes ZEC can be used to buy things but given its volatile nature its not a primary use case. ZEC is Gold 2.0. and you can create collteral pools backing a more privacy based stable fiat to provide to your favorite country. But, I think you will come up snake eyes over and over if you think ZEC is going to replace a fiat. From the little I know about @decentralistdan and @earthrise, it seems like they may live in an alternate universe where people donât have any choices and where ZEC is the only option. So in their world ZEC isnât volatile because its the only option. Thatâs not reality. Believe me, I wish your vision was realistic and possible. But, I simply think its a dream and as a ZEC holder, I need to speak up and hopefully see ZEC funded development focused on areas where I think ZEC will succeed. Just as important, what I have been proposing doesnât hurt ZEC or take away from what you would like to see, it just changes how development funds are used to focus on what I believe is a less risky strategy. POS, programmability, ZSA/Stablecoins, Ease of Use, Txn speeds, decentralized development ecosystem (which I think requires gas/fees)âŚ
Edit - I think its important to have a privacy based DeFi ecosystem with 1) ultra low volitility; highly collateralized assets ideally backed 100% with subject Co government bonds for day to day spending 2) a fixed supply utility token such as ZEC that earns yield (from ecoystem gas/fees) to secure the network and works as a medium to long-term SOV (its too volitile for short term day to day transactions. 3) an ecosystem where third parties can connect and settle using either a fixed supply/yield or variable supply/burn tokenomics for DeFi use cases.
2 Likes
how about you post the poll on twitter or threads or something that isnât the community forum, no one checks this
1 Like
they should post this on a public space like twitter where its not 130 people voting where 95% are devs with a vested interest in the outcome of poll.
1 Like
Zcash decentralization is actually fragmentation
2 Likes
Wanted to revisit my thoughts from a year ago,
-
Still think the DevFund should be continued. Still think the rate should be lower â This reinforces hard work internally as well as externally (No âIâ in team).
-
FPF exists!
-
Can ZCG become independent? Iâm not sure
-
I love @Michae2xl 's idea about the ZecHubDAO earning a small amount of the block rewards, however it would need substantial support from the community. The risk is there, but so is the opportunity to help better govern our community and support those who are working hard.
Would love everyone in the community to reflect on last years opinions and how they may or may not be different.
ps.
My thoughts from last year seem to be relevant. Education has never been more important.
3 Likes
It is really insane to me that we are looking at anynomous polls to decide what to the with the dev fund.
The reality is that it doesnât matter what anyoneâs idealistic view of what this project is/should be matters.
The reality is clear with the dev fund the coin is close to all time lows. It is one of the worst performing crypto assets in the whole space but somehow people want to continue a dev fund that hasnât worked since the projects inception.
None of this altruistic sentiment surrounding the project will matter if the coin goes to 0. At that point we become insolvent and nothing can be done. We are dangerously close to that if we donât change course.
For this project to survive Zec needs to go up in price. For that to happen the dev fund must die, we must go to pos and halving has to go flawlessly. Why? Because the project needs to mimic bitcoin as much as possible as the market reacts on speculation.
Speculation that things will turn around and price will go up. Zec at $100 dollars will keep the project going. At 20 dollars and lower as it is as of today it wonât if the market sees we canât even get rid of something so obvious as the dev fund.
I read this forum and it is insane to me how people act like the tokens price is irrelevant when it should be the number 1 focus. Without a viable token in the market place that goes up in price this project is dead.
I hope leadership sees this. Kill the dev fund. This isnât about what is right or wrong or what is in the spirit of the project.
All of that is irrelevant if the project dies. And it is dying. It is on life support. Get rid of of the dev fund. Move to POS. Make those announcements and hope the market reacts.
Nothing else matters at this point.
7 Likes
Most people think the project is dying making their assessment based on price. A price that has been manipulatively lowered over the last few years. All the development has been going on under the hood with no demonstration of significant progress. The transition to PoS has been delayed without announcing reasons, although they are clear. After a year, you will see that you have been led to believe in non-existent problems.
7 Likes
Iâve said it a hundred times (btw, I wholly agree with your ideas here), the ZF and ECC have effectively censored themselves by leaning so far into USA based regulatory compliance (501C status, and btw there are both pros and cons to being regulatory protected in the USA).
Neither of Zcashâs primary organizations are allowed by law to try and market/ hype/ pump/ etc the market perception for ZEC.
So that leaves this ecosystem in a mess because the only people who can try and affect the value of ZEC are us individual investors, and we are the least capable to do so. It is a sad conundrum 
4 Likes
Money is literally how you know the health of a business. This is a startup business.
The token which they use to sell to fund everything is tanking in price. At some point if it goes to single digits they will have no money to do anything.
It is not being manipulated. The market has decided what zec as a project is doing is not worthwhile to invest in.
This is business 101. How is this hard to understand?
1 Like
I have been observing the project for the past 6 years on a daily basis, spending a lot of time analyzing any information that comes in. And there are some things I wonât risk writing about, because I donât have enough evidence. I can see the ripples in the water, but I donât know the real reasons. It would look like a crazy conspiracy theory. But in general terms, since the middle of 2022, itâs like some force has gotten behind Zcash and visually things have gone drastically wrong. From a development standpoint, we supposedly stopped. At the very least, there have been no major end-user updates, although the backend has progressed significantly. The devs wasted no time, but we didnât pluck a single tasty fruit. From a market perspective, ZEC failed any technical levels in the most crucial places where any other asset would rise 70% of the time. I donât think I need to convince you of that, we have the chart. You wonât find anything worse, and this is absolutely not the schedule a cult project should have. At the same time, ZEC grows in the most unexpected places against the entire market when the situation becomes critical. Given the general mood, this is impossible if someone is not looking after the coin. Retail investors donât have such amounts, speculators donât do this, miners and funds donât buy ZEC.
On this topic. The fact is that DF is likely to be approved. Those who donât like it have a couple options. If youâre right, the project will probably really die and youâll have to accept the losses now. If Iâm right, it will be fine because the project is too important and it will never die. No matter which way we go, the end goal will be reached.
Either way you also need to realize that most of the issue will be sold one way or another. Grantees donât always sell ZECs at current prices. For example, I analyzed a table of large grantees receiving payment with a timeline and found no indication of price impact.
4 Likes
This has nothing to do with your original statement that the health of the project is not correlated to token price.
You have 0 evidence of some dark force behind the price action other than âbelieve me broâ.
You literally wrote a paragraph of conspiracy theory you created in your own head with 0 backing. Or the good ol âI canât share what i foundâ.
What?
1 Like
I wrote you your options and the fact that you wonât be able to influence the DF decision. Even if all we voting on coins, in the last hour of voting a person would come in with exactly 10 coins over the total (to make it clear that they have more) and vote for the fund. And itâs not a conspiracy theory, itâs happened early.
PS.
Every time different people come to the forum and open everyoneâs eyes to âhow great it would be without the stupid fundâ. Friends, itâs already been tested. Nothing good will ever happen. This experiment has already been done. Youâre will welcome here.
4 Likes
Thatâs maybe one case when a non devfund failed. This does not mean the devfund is necessary. If you fall, does it mean you cannot walk?
3 Likes
I always point to the same thing. Zclassic was built on the idea of no dev fund. Then they ran out of funding. Then they suggested a âŚ.you guessed it: a dev fund.
1 Like
Youâre probably right. Zcash could have died by now, even with the fund, if nobody needs it. But Zcash is alive.
I think there is a psychological trap regarding DF that makes us think that DF is needed by someone other than ourselves. No. DF is not primarily needed by developers, but by investors themselves, if they want to shorten the payback period of their investment and get closer to the day when they actually get what they are hoping for. The presence of DF significantly shortens this period and makes Zcashâs success more likely, because developers will have time to do much more with it than without it in the same period of time. The psychological trap is caused by the fact that the enforced democracy on this issue makes it seem like everyone here is being persuaded to vote for DF at all costs. Although Iâm sure that even if the community voted against DF, Zcash would continue to exist and the core protocol would find sponsors, but we would lose funding for all the other great infrastructure projects.
Why I think democracy is enforced. Because nothing at all would have prevented the existence of some kind of funding fund from the very beginning, as has happened in many other projects, without all these votes. And announce âhere is Zcash such. fund is a mandatory part of the program, whether you like it or not.â. But we invented this game for ourselves, ostensibly to intrigue, although each of us deep down realizes that abandoning DF means shooting ourselves in the foot. By saying âevery one of usâ - I donât mean those who joined recently, but those who have been waiting for years for Zcash to shine.
2 Likes