Future of Zcash dev funding — megathread / everything in one place

I know, i just wanted to hear it from @str4d after he could check within seconds my timestamp , but as allways with unfomfortable questions only silence follows …


He made an ironical comment, at least i get it that way…


haha oopsies! sorry @brian

1 Like

Or, you know, I could be busy doing engineering work on Zcash - like working on NU4 ZIP drafts ahead of the draft due date this week - and not be constantly monitoring the forum…

To remind you of what was actually committed to by ECC:


Another idea… maybe a component that other proposals might find useful.

Could DevFund txns be timelocked, ie: mature after a variable number of blocks? If possible, the pool/miner could assign funds to fit our NU cycle.

For example, maybe they don’t agree with the current NU content but want the one afterwards to happen.

Its a form of signalling as these txns can be seen, however DevFund fees are still generated instead of being burnt.

Downside, pools could use this to defund things they dont like (ie: PoS) - so there’s that…

If the max offset to maturity was allowed to be large it would cause discomfort to all involved by delaying payments (pool, miner, devfund recipients)

If the max offset was small (ie: 4) there would be almost no effect (300 second delay) - making this purely a way to measure miner/pool sentiment.

Another edit:-
This would be a poolside setting so miners would not be able to directly affect things. Pools setting a long delay would likely lose miners to those setting a short delay which helps align inventives

1 Like

This note from ECC is important, everyone please read:

Exactly!. I was reading some guy list the expenses of ECC and how much they spend every month and how much they need, and im thinking. Dude, where do you think that money comes from? Its not from mined ZEC, its from sold ZEC for USD.People pay you with their hard earned cash, not with ZEC but USD, investing in your capabilities so they get a return later, not finance your lifestyle. And by the looks of it you are not delivering. And when you do that people tend to lose confidence in your abilities. You know what they say about confidence , hard to gain, easy to lose. So maybe asking for more money isn’t the smart move right now. I bought my first ZEC at 12$ coz i believed in it, but i dont want to finance someones lifestyle. I follow the leading Zcash people on twitter in hope to gain confidence again in what i invested, and right now its more about the time, then the money. So far i got a bunch of cooking recipes and lotta leftist propaganda. Oh yeah, and then Zooko blocked me. Zcash better man up, because 20% of 0 is still 0, but they are so caught up in their math about FR they seem to forget that.


dons ZIP Editor hat

A couple of submitters have asked me questions to the effect of whether a pull request must be up on GitHub before the draft submission deadline.

The answer is no, submissions do not need to have GitHub PRs by the deadline. We will consider any draft that is written up on the forum before the deadline to have been submitted. We understand that not everyone is familiar with GitHub or reStructuredText.

If you are able to put up a PR, then please do so (because that really facilitates review), but don’t worry if you can’t do so in time, as long as it has been posted on the forum in the format of a ZIP.


I aim to please. No borders, no nations!


heh, your reaction is completely apprehensible. the problem is, if you can detect possible underperformance of team by their social presence and views (if this matters much for you) - you should have done it much earlier. but you were waiting for something, you took a risk. anyway, personal views and social presence of founders/team doesnt matter much. probably you wouldnt give any clues about who’s leftist who’s not if number was at your desirable level.
what really matters - is project as is fit or unfit for current market. is model feasible or not. will it be fit in future or not. i see many different persons applied for future panel. it will be interesting. and for me personally, conclusions that would probably be made after it, will give a strong hint also where btc is also going. this is not an unique case with current uncertainity about zcash. there are more general questions to be answered, about future of pow and/or private cryptocurrencies as they are. will these ideas (re)gain appreciacion on more mature stage, or not. if there are strong hints that not - then not just zcash, but btc, xmr eth are also doomed. what majority of currently involved in crypto people want, circa 2018-2019: insane gains and belonging to some cult (btc, xrp, bsv, bch). insane and irrational interest from various lending (eth). marginal betting on any ticker (bitmex), ieo(former ico) lotteries (binance). or at least follow any pump in price of no matter what. majority of people believe in hardness of money of pow coins only as long as their precious number goes up. or has some concrete support after any complete downfall.
minor percentage of new money/cryptocurrency users actually want to buy some decentralized sov and moe. robust privacy. hedge on different chains. tiny number of people really cares about decentalisation, algos, technical and even basic economic merits, wants rather be their own bank then just follow any (cheer)leader. from investor point of view, zcash team and foundation could be blamed on one issue. no efforts/underperforming in attraction of dumb(est) money in numbers. and, additionally not deceiving existing investors with beautiful overpromises. and, as i see possible/questionable breaking of some existing promises.
as far as i see, in near future all of the current kings of the cryptomarket will eventually become naked. even btc. (zcash was just kinda one of downfall leaders because of weak pr, poor fighting of black pr from one side, and lagging/non speeding up in ux enhancement to be on one step with competitors from another.
after that… things will get interesting. we may see some renaissance for normal coins to pre-2017 valuation merits and narratives. and if zcash will manage to survive and evolve - it has its place among them.
or this will be dead end for every actual project, not only zcash. even btc will fall to a much lower niche, and blockstream will say bye bye thanks for stacking overpriced sats, you funded us and our private investors extremely well, dear maga-hat err… maxi-hat hodlers.
and gambling will find new ways.
so, dont be so upset, this is all venture. it can win, it can fail.


Nice thoughts. Here is mine, much more simple thoughts and shorter to write too, or maybe call them “Questions that keep me up at night” (3:22AM)
www.travala.com just started accepting XMR payments… among lots of other cryptocurrencies, but i dont care about them because they are not quite the same as XMR, are they? Only one other coin is on the same level. And great use case too, booking a hotel and paying with Zcash. The entire idea behind privacy coins. ZF was suppose to push adoption.What do we as a community need to do or how high block % does ZF need to make this happen on travala and 100 more like it. Is it really that hard? Coz monero sure as hell dont have a foundation and a block reward or a company.



@daira and @gtank
Just checking, you want pull requests in this format?

Like python? I suck at python. I can just use it as like markdown right? just so it looks pretty? or are there actual rules I need to follow? (I have actively avoided python for years. I like perl.)

I have no problem just using it as a formatting tool. like md/bbcode/etc. just don’t want to do it wrong and make more work.


1 Like

There’s no Python involved it’s just another markup language (albeit it has strong links to Python/Sphinx) but is widely used in technical writing/documentation.

Here’s a handy cheatsheet https://github.com/ralsina/rst-cheatsheet/blob/master/rst-cheatsheet.rst and worst case you can always convert a Markdown (or other) file to RST through pandoc but you might need a quick manual tidy after https://pandoc.org/try/.


I have a clarifying question for @acityinohio, @amiller / the Zcash Foundation. My apologies if this was already asked/answered somewhere else.

The Zcash Foundation’s mission is the following:

“The Zcash Foundation is a 501©3 nonprofit focused on financial privacy. We build and support privacy infrastructure for the public good, primarily serving users of the Zcash protocol and blockchain.”

It’s an applaudable mission. My question is whether the direct receipt of funds under any of the various proposals would be spent entirely on Zcash related activities. Would this force a change in your mission? For example, I believe you financially supported the Monero conference. Do you believe the direct receipt of funds from the Zcash community would, or should, restrict that kind of freedom?


They are subject to “restricted” and “unrestricted” funding which depends on whether the fund is deemed a “solicited” or “unsolicited” contribution (either it was asked for a specific purpose or not or a disclaimer identifies the purpose(s) prior to the contribution)
(See pg 11 of their 990)
This is what Ive been going on about, why you cant mandate what a contribution is for but only trust the ZFND will seek to fulfill its objective statement


The Zcash Foundation only donated around 121 Monero to that conference. At the time, one Monero was worth around $43, so they donated around $5,203 to the Monero Conference.

While we’re on the topic of prior expenditures, I’m much more concerned about the ECC’s May 2018 investments in Agoric and Starkware, which presumably were much larger than $5,000. Those investments were presumably made using Founders Reward coins, since the ECC does not have any “alternate revenue streams” besides the Founders Reward. Those investments, made with Founders Reward coins, should not inure to the benefit of a private for-profit company, especially one that may “wind down or pivot” depending on which choice the community makes regarding a future development fund. As a prerequisite to receiving any portion of any future development fund, the ECC should be made to divest those investments into a trust managed for the benefit of future Zcash development.


I appreciate the context and I think I understand your concern with ECC’s prior investments. I think that’s a different subject than what I’m intending here.

I’m simply trying to clarify my own understanding of the Foundation’s mission and how they are thinking about this as they have previously stated that they may support other things related to privacy but not necessarily directly related to Zcash. The conference was the only example I could think of. Howard, this was intended an honest question to them. I’ve been thinking through implications of various proposals and am simply curious about how they may might affect or influence various parties.


I would guess the 501c3 status is at least a very good defense, all their donations are restricted to a charitable purpose that aligns with the organization’s mission, if not they lose their status (Internal Revenue Code prohibits 501©(3) nonprofits from engaging in any activities that fall outside of its statement of purpose)
What kind of various parties do you mean? (Might help me to see things from your point of view better)


Sure, though I’m really not trying to communicate a point of view. My question is if dev funds from the Zcash blockchain are allocated to the Zcash Foundation, is the foundation then obligated to use those funds solely in support Zcash related development, to the exclusion of other projects such as Monero, Grin, Beam, Ycash or others?

Note that while I believe Zcash is likely to become de facto digital cash, I am fully supportive of other projects with a common mission and hope they are supported.


I would just like to say that I think the donation to the Monero Konferenco was entirely consistent with the Foundation’s existing purpose and mission. Very clearly so; no grey area.

No, I don’t, and I think the question was quite unhelpful at this point.