Let’s talk about ASIC mining


I understand the reason why they did not want to fork, and I do agree with not rushing a fix. But I constantly keep hearing from Zcash dev/members saying we voted for this. “The community decided”. When in fact we did not.

Then I raise the issue of, “we the community” were not infavor of ASICs, but that didnt matter now did it?
Will this be a repeat when we “vote” for no more funding? Will our “majority” vote matter?

Or will the funding go through no matter what we vote, because once again we had “zero effect”…

This is what it really comes down to. You guys keep acting like we the community got to decide. Infact we did not. Now you are saying we will get to decide again.

Do you not see why I have a hard time beliving we “the community” will have any effect on the descion? it didnt count last time…


I suggest you go back and re-read my post:

That’s the hard reality of whatever vote, or system we come up with until things change and the Foundation has more resources/influence on the core protocol.


I have not had any “offical” response yet for the question I keep asking.

Did ZCash dev/foundation think the majority of the community was in favor of ASICs?

I understand you didnt have code to fork in time, completely logical. But you guys keep comming on here saying we voted for it, or it was a vocal few who wanted to keep it anti-asic.

When anyone provides any data showing otherwise, that data isnt good enough.

Just come out and say it, “we know the majorty was in favor of a anti-asic fork, however due to time issues, we cant do what the community wants, We know how much anti-asic means to alot of the current community and will do out best to fix it, but we cant risk it”

Its always, “you cant prove the majority wanted it”. “Them polls are not good enough”. “Them voices are a vocal few”, inside the almost 6,000 post topic about ANTI-ASICs…

Im not stupid, I know why you guys did it. I want you guys to stop being so deceitful with the way you are portraying how the ASIC change was voted for, and the “community” accepted it

All I read from that is we can vote all we want, and they dont have to listen…


You really should read and follow the links I keep posting for you. They say exactly that.


Thanks alot Shawn you are very speedy on the replys and I thank you for all the time you have taken.

Those links dont answer any questions, infact they raise more. But the way you guys come on the fourms and post things saying “we voted for ASICs” and it was our choice, it makes me feel like you are trying to place the blame on us.

Even at the start of this thread, it sounded like it was the users fault for not getting out to vote. Not just you, other devs have come on here now, basically saying “we should of voted, if we didnt, that is why we have ASICs”.

First link does not say anything about how you know the MAJORITY was against ASICs. Or that you know that the community does not want ASICs. Its just a broad " We want to support miners all over the world", nothing about how we know the community does not want them, and will try to fork them off ASAP when its safe to do so.

Second link has this

The Foundation is in the process of adopting community feedback as part of our own governance process, and in fact has already planned to represent the community’s interest in this debate via a proposed ballot for our election process.

Sounds like that vote almost gave a choice in the matter, but finding out later in this thread, had ZERO EFFECT. And once again, You still have not answered my question, let me ask it for the 4th time.

Did ZCash dev/foundation think the majority of the community was in favor of ASICs?


I’ve said my piece and tried explaining the situation to you as clear and as concise as I can. I encourage you to re-read my previous posts. I will no longer be replying in this thread unless something new comes up.


Please I ask you just one more quesiton…can you please answer this, I have asked it four times already

Did ZCash dev/foundation think the majority of the community was in favor of ASICs?

EDIT: Its an important question to know the answer too. If they did know the majority was ANTI-ASIC, it means they went against what the community wanted. What is to prevent them from doing the same with the funding vote in the future.


I have seen your question, I’m not an official representative of The Zcash Foundation or Zcash Company so I cannot give you an official response.

I’m simply a Forum Moderator here to help users and answer questions as I can to the best of my knowledge.


Zcash community will never be able to decide important issues. They might throw us a bone of appearance of it being community decision, but like it was a ruse with Anti-Asic fork, it will not influence anything as there will always be excuses, oh you could have applied for a seat anyone could get in. Then they said not all were accepted, and finally that their vote didn’t matter. It was done only to appease the masses who were ready to revolt.


@Lisfin you should read the very first post (after the header) here, should give you an answer
What happened? Rationalization


They still refuse to admit the majority of the community was ANTI-ASIC.

You think they could atleast come out and say that much, instead they make it sound like it was something we as the community voted in, or they had no choice and had to fork, still refusing to acknowledge they were going against the communitys wishes.

I know why they did what they did, I dont care about that, I also agree with not instant forking away with out testing code. You are losing focus of the real problem I am pointing out tho

Its how they presented the illusion of choice(useless votes).

The Foundation is in the process of adopting community feedback as part of our own governance process, and in fact has already planned to represent the community’s interest in this debate via a proposed ballot for our election process.

Does this not sound like the community is helping make the choice or voting for something? A Ballot, and election process, sounds legit…nope didnt count at all.

I understand they had code in the works, and could not risk changing it, OK, NO PROBLEM, I completely get it.

They need to start saying that than, not that “you guys voted for it”, “You had a panel that voted”, “Should of showed up to vote”.

Dont try and present things to your community that make it look like they are making the choice when in fact it has zero effect on the outcome.


I understand where you’re coming from, because like you I used to think I knew that the community at large was against ASICs based on the activity on this forum. However, if you had attended Zcon0 and met hundreds of community members in real life, you would have been very surprised at how many people were enthusiastically supportive of ASICs. In fact, the anti-ASIC voices were a minority at the conference.

I know that’s not hard data or the answer that you’re looking for, but anecdotally I can say that the circumstances surrounding the decision made last summer were not so black and white. I’m not suggesting that the attendees of the conference are wholely representative of the entire community, but I don’t think the Zcash Company or any of it’s employees were being intentionally deceptive as you suggest.

The fact that the company now has harmony mining on the roadmap should tell you that they’re trying to do their best to act in a manner consistent with the desires of the community, but determining what those desires are isn’t an exact science. At least give them some credit for trying.


As the devs keep saying to me when I show any evidence about how the majorty was against asic, "how representative is this of the community?"

Just because the people that showed up at Zcon0 liked ASICs, does not mean this is a representation of the norm. And if you honestly belive ASICs were a community choice, I dont know what to tell you. Only the people that bought ASICs come on here to defend them.

Show me the people that did not buy a ASIC on here defending them?


I addressed this point in my last post:

The conference attendees were only a small subset of the entire community, however you can’t simply dismiss those people and their opinions. They’re likely more invested into Zcash than some forum members, simply by the fact that they took the time, energy, and money to attend the conference.

I believe that the community is much larger than the people who frequent this forum, and determining the desires of a large decentralized community isn’t an exact science. Online ballots can be gamed and there isn’t yet a fool proof method of overcoming Sybil attacks that I’m aware of. The truth is that last summer it wasn’t as black and white as you’re suggesting, although it’s easy to think so if you’re limiting your scope to this forum.

I’m wasn’t defending ASICs in my last post, I was defending Zcash Co. and the devs, who you’ve suggested were being deceptive. The fact that they’re now proposing Harmony mining which will bring GPUs back onto the network is proof that they care about the GPU miners, but it wasn’t something that they felt could be rushed last summer. I believe Zcash Co.'s decisions were made in good faith, but they’re not infallible.


You just keep repeating the same strawman arguments. The community never had a choice. For or against, it didnt matter.

I will now ask you, what I have asked all the devs/team members.

Do you think the majority was in favor of ASICs?

What do you honestly believe? And most the community was the miners, who else was using Zcash last year?




Following the guidelines is the only requirement to participate in the project whether its talking here or on another chat platform, submitting a ZIP or a for grant proposal
The leniency (tolerance is a better word) exemplified by the moderators I believe to be an extension of the mission of zcash where for zcash it’s empowering Financial Freedom and here it’s empowering freedom of speech but this freedom is only a reflection of our self discipline in adherence to the (very simple) community guidelines set forth
The community’s general willingness to acceptand excerise these very basic guidelines further empowers their tolerance of (some) things viewed as potentially breaking them
The door swings both ways


Not sure if your replys were for me? If so not sure what guidelines I have broken?


All of your questions are valid but some of your posts may be perceived as an attempt to solicit a negative reaction which is trolling and against the guidelines
That means regardless of whether or not it’s actually true (or whether or not you were conscious of it) you have now been made aware of the outside perception of these “attempts”, please stop


Im not trying to offend anyone. How is asking questions that people seem to miss or ignore trying to troll?
Can you please link some of the things that offended you?

I am offended people keep repeating the same lies and never back it up with any links or substance that supports their claims. Im sorry pointing these things out offends you, its not my intention.