Manufacturing Consent: NoamChom's Nu6 Block Reward Proposal

Yes. It also intends to be sure that ZEC are less freely available in the next 4 years, which will imperatively make the recipients of their % of the freebies treat them with more respect.

My belief here is that Qedit and Shielded Labs are intentionally “under funded” because it doesn’t make sense to accidentally over fund them (wherenever there is always the possibility of ZCG performing budget gap coverage).

Overall as many of you know, I believe there are huge problems with over funding organizations because it inevitably forces them to find more esoteric, creative, value negative means of keeping bussy… Look no further than the Zcash Parachute project, countless other ZCG grants, and on the ECC side - they over spent in many value-negative initiatives in the last 4 years. ZF is still paying legal counsel and auditors to conduct Trademark battles…

There are better things to spend capital on, this is why I believe that funding for free needs to drop lower. We’ve got to think about the bottom line in these next 4 years. The easy money belief system needs to be eliminated.

Yes I believe that governance needs to be improved. No, I don’t believe NU6 should be the field for which that debate is held/ resolved

I agree in theory, but in practical terms… My guess is that this is impossible given that NU6 happens in only 8 months.

My guess is that they’ve got the good fortune of having not been investigated by the IRS yet. We’d only know in hindsight, whether or not it is legal to achieve 501c3 status for a project named Zcash, then to become a protocol encoded receiver of Free ZEC coins… which the organization then turns around and sells into the market to create a huge bag of Bitcoin.

I call that a Crypto Hedge Fund, taking speculative risks, from the pockets of the project investors (ZEC holders). Maybe I’m too conservative in my assessment, maybe the IRS would see it differently.

All Good questions, I don’t have explicit responses. But if my proposal gains traction, I’ll put in the work to formalize expectations around these topics.

I believe that it is a broadly supported theme that I’ve created here:
Under the next block subsidy model, recipients will be banned from taking ZEC from the protocol and then re-investing them into other non-Zcash speculative crypto projects.

Correct.

Where did you pull that generic theme from? I looked at the ZF mission statement, and it speaks directly to Zcash. I hadn’t noticed any remarks that open the book to sponsoring anything they want, at their discretion.

Once again though, funding other stuff like Tor is fine. Even funding StarkWare is fine. But I propose that it shouldn’t be taken out of the pockets of ZEC users/ investors.

I understand how you reached your 60% proposal, its bottom up/ worst case modeling. My opinion here is that we’ve all got to say our prayers at night, keep buying & zodling, and keep building & evangelizing. ZEC should be valued by the market well above $300 in the years ahead.

I’ll ask all of the readers here to imagine a best case scenario… add an extra zero to GGuy’s totals here from a $40 annual ZEC. Let’s instead suppose $400 per coin.

Exactly my point for years now… its only speculation, but I would assert that if the orgs had been acting with some interests toward ZEC - rather than Agoric, Bitcoin, StarkWare, or Ethereum

We could easily be holding this debate within the context of ZEC being valued at $100 each.

Block reward receivers shouldn’t be shooting their project in the feet, by derisking out of their project natve coin. It is counter productive.

Great Question.

Once again, ECC is sitting on a warchest of $20 million in others assets with liquidity. The block reward should never be the sole funding mechanism for Zcash work. All of the altcoins that ECC owns today can fully fund the organization for at least 3 years, if not 4.

Boiling my proposal down to annual capital flows based on $40 per ZEC for 4 years doesn’t make sense. I’ve made a few broader assumptions

  1. Significantly more valuable ZEC in the years 2025-2028 (lets suppose $100 - 400)
  2. Organizations sell-down their huge bags of BTC, Agoric, ETH, Starkware to cover funding stresses
  3. Broad re-visioning of ZEC as a valuable asset to save, rather than a liquid, dilutive fiat-like digital coin

yes!

Exactly. And I am here suggesting that this maligned feature-product situation has been created due to the moral/ behavioral pitfalls created by Free Money (ZEC). With less available Free ZEC, this entire ecosystem will be forced to focus on creating value. (Rather than creating $2 million dollar YouTube videos, for example)

5 Likes