Zcash Social Contract

I wanted to point out relevant work the government is doing with controlling money as a counter point. Sorry if its unclear.

1 Like

Privacy everywhere means ZEC will need to work in the KYC world. It’s the largest market and where most users are. the non KYC world likely won’t be able to support development and maintenance.

The best hedge for ZEC holders is to be agnostic to KYC or non KYC. Just make ZEC work everywhere.

1 Like

There’s an important difference between those two things:

  1. Requiring KYC to ensure not to lose your coins (what is being discussed above).
  2. Being KYC compliant for certain usages of the token.

I don’t think point #1 represents the future of Zcash, whereas #2 definitely seem like something we can excel at.

1 Like

Just wanted to say I can agree to this :smiling_face_with_three_hearts: :zebra: :shield:

Only a minor disagreement to Mr Dismad

We should all be here for

“Private, fungible, Bitcoin for the World”

Communicating to people that ZEC is cash-like is dastardly!
Nobody wants cash, because it has no long term value proposition. We would be idiots to be investing ourselves into a private digital cash project, because it assuredly would make us all poor on the long timeline.

1 Like

Everybody wants cash because everybody wants to use cash - or something with the same properties as cash.

The key word is use, right now zcash is only useful for naughty things or to oppressed minorites - that needs to change.

Money only has power and influence when it moves, static zcash is no better than bitcoin.

The labor class and poverty classes want cash. The ruling/ capitalist classes want hard assets that accrue value much greater than the pace of cash inflation.

We shouldn’t be targeting the labor/ poverty classes with our products. Why? Target the wealthy, and once they become user-evangelists, the labor/ poverty classes will follow the lead.

Lets follow Elon’s blueprint:
The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me) | Tesla

1 Like

i also believe this is true. in the past cash is depreciated over time. but the offset is that a) people don’t hold cash. it’s usually largely spent in 2 weeks for 80%+ of the world. so depreciating cash doesn’t really affect them and their labor wages tend to go up over time. they just always spend money and don’t save much. b) the people that do have excess money invest. stocks have beat inflation by a wide margin. and bonds also beat inflation.

we now have this unique situation where we can collaterize cash with bonds. i think this collateral combined with privacey is the next evolution of cash. private stablecoins – it’s very similar to how gold collaterizes paper currency. now it’s treasury bonds collateralizing digital currency. and the interest income could help people beat inflation (in some scenarios of people get paid to hold).

everyone wants the stability of cash. it’s what we do with excess earnings. the mistake zcash has made is to believe it is cash. It will never have the properties needed by poor or rich people due to its day to day virility and lack of collateral and lack of utility (which creates the volatility).

ZEC as collateral seems to make it a utility token or digital gold collaterizing the network. but that requires trust and massive improvements. privacey alone won’t cut it.

:100: - ZEC it’s a product for people with excess savings. we need to stop all spending on zec as cash. zgo, zingo, ambassadors, education are all spending for zec as fiat. it’s a waste of money until we have stablecoins and a broader based monetary ecosystem.

stablecoins are a product for everyone. if they are 100% backed by government bonds or collateral, and this is the type of scale we need to keep transaction costs down and enable everyone to transact privately.


@joshs as new ECC CEO, what are your thoughts on this discrepancy? (vs. the ECC and z.cash mainpages)

Do you still believe that it is prudent to be broadcasting Zcash (and ZEC) as private digital cash, that users ought to be spending on the whim?

Or are you leaning toward the belief, that Zcash (and ZEC) are due for a change in the nuances, such that we begin to broadcast ZEC as a valuable asset, and Zcash as a network where soon-to-be private stablecoins will be available?

1 Like

I think I answered that in the functional architecture I laid out.


I never been a fan of the trickle down theory. It can work, but it doesn’t always work. The problem with trickle down is greed, humans will almost always be greedy when given the chance. Bottom up not only is more organic, it includes more people, and I’ve found the less fortunate are usually less greedy, who would have thought? Privacy for the world, or privacy for the 1% ? The bottom tends to be less educated however, which is a problem and one I like to help solve. I’m not sure we will ever agree here and I know this is a :hot_pepper: topic for many. :coffee:


another way to think about it is target the savers not wealthy.


Happy to read this!! Do you believe most of the community agrees to this as well?

Just to clarify though, the initial post was an attempt to clarify the more controversial question:

IF, in order to secure Zcash as being “Private, fungible, cash for the world”, would we be willing to forgo the 21M cap? Or is the 21M cap an untouchable holy variable?

I think we have some heavy division in the community. BUT, I think having strong differences in subsets of the privacy is normal superset, can be healthy!

I think if we put fear aside, most would say yes as long as its sound and benefits the majority of the ecosystem. Fear is at an ATH rn though :cowboy_hat_face:, and we can’t ignore the emotional tsunami that is bound to hit the beach if such a low level lego is changed.

I think another friendly fork may result, which is also ok IMHO, for those who will never change minds.

I think everyone should try and entertain the idea that even the mighty Bitcoin will need to adapt moving into the future. :eyes: :student:

1 Like

ZEC ain’t going to 10k, fam :joy:

you missed the point. the point is no matter what price zec is at, 10 or 10,000 it will be too volitile for the average person who gets paid every two weeks and spends there money at the end of two weeks. they can’t take the risk that at any day they can lose 10% and not pay rent or not buy food. zec is for savers; not spenders.


I think everyone in the ecosystem should find where they stand in this diagram, because I have a feeling many are pinned to one side only, when it should be more evenly distributed.

That’s the thing, that’s not your decision. Let folks choose for themselves! I thought you were free market?

1 Like

it’s not free when i can’t vote. it’s our money as zec holders you are gambling with. plus you are giving away the opportunity to bring privacey to people. it’s going to happen, it just won’t be from zec if we let the current people run this. i am 100% for choice. stablecoins, ZSA, and anything else. i’m for broad choice.

i’m also for choice to KYC or not via the wallet,

i’m for on and off ramps. and inconmectedness


You vote by buying , earning, mining, ZEC. I assume you do, so I’m not sure how you don’t vote?