Personally I’m happy with the poll options…
1 Like
Hi @reuben,
I did not propose or support the proposal “Option E: 65% Masternodes, 10% Miners, 25% Dev (@Zen and @norsegaud)”. I think it’s going too low for miners (and masternodes), although I haven’t looked at a hashrate curve in a long time…
My proposals were:
“70% Masternodes 20% Miners 10% Dev
or (if you absolutely want the CF)
70% Masternodes 15% Miners 10% Dev 5% Community”
@norsegaud get behind the “70% Masternodes 15% Miners 10% Dev 5% Community” too, then this is the one to keep in the pool and erasing the “Option E: 65% Masternodes, 10% Miners, 25% Dev (@Zen and @norsegaud)”.
Thank you.
2 Likes
Apologies will rectify.
1 Like
No problem with the confusion.
I see that you also changed the next option (“E” choice) and as you changed it it now matches the main choice I originally made (“70% Masternodes 20% Miners 10% Dev”).
So there is nothing to change, except to add my support for option E.
Thank you.
I have seen all the discussion going on when i went to vacation
And sorry for the late response but something as important as tail emissions is very important and we cannot be central planners
So here are the details
its true that monero with its 2 min block time and 0.6 xmr gives us 432 xmr per day
and we all know how successful it was
and where as in grin with a block time of 1 min and 1 grin gives us 1440 grin per day
and we also know how it went
so if we have firo with tail emissions like
0.4 FIRO/block = 230.4 FIRO/day
0.5 FIRO/block = 288 FIRO/day
0.6 FIRO/block = 345.6 FIRO/day
0.7 FIRO/block = 403.2 FIRO/day
0.8 FIRO/block = 460.8 FIRO/day
0.9 FIRO/block = 518.4 FIRO/day
1 FIRO/block = 576 FIRO/day
since its to give confidence to our user that their value of the coin will not be less its unwise to give such large tail emissions as 1 firo i say we go for compromise of 0.7 or 0.8 firo tail emission from 0.4 if its too low
but best if we let community decide and let everyone give economic arguments why they want which tail emissions
it’s absolutely necessary to have sound discussion and we cannot be central planners we are meant to replace
Hi thanks for weighing in though this is pretty late and the proposal was passed and implemented. It’s not a centrally made decision as we had several rounds of discussions and even gave people opportunity to introduce other options (as long as other people wanted it too and not just a singular person). You can take a look at the entire discussions in the Poll section for this.
I think just looking at absolute values don’t tell the whole story. Monero’s emission had an initial emission of 18.4 million which in 8 years was already totally emitted (with arguably a higher rate of inflation than Firo). Firo is still 4 years away from total emission of initial bootstrap supply of 21.4 million at the new revised model. You cannot compare Monero and Firo directly without accounting for the initial bootstrap supply or else it’s like comparing Doge with Bitcoin.
If we view Monero’s model as a ‘successful one’, the tail emission as a percentage of the total bootstrap supply is very similar.
Monero tail emission a year: 157,680 out of 18.4 million = 0.858% inflation/year
Firo tail emission a year: 210,240 out of 21.4 million = 0.982% inflation/year
This is pretty much on par and over time will even out and actually drop.
I also think we have given several rounds of discussion over the years on tail emission and just for this year’s discussion is summarized here: Firo Finalized Tokenomics Results | Firo - Privacy-preserving cryptocurrency
- April 2024: Initial discussion about tokenomics. blog forum
- June-July 2024: Polls were held regarding tail emission, the development and community fund, and the rate of emission
- July 2024: A thread was opened to ensure that the final poll’s voting options would cover all options that the community cared about.
- August 2024: Final polls to vote on the proposed changes.
So I agree that discussions should be had and there shouldn’t be overly centralized planning. I think we did the best we could given the circumstances and reminded people to weigh in and posted numerous videos explaining the pros and cons of each. I think the only major kickback we had are from miners understandably so but they were noticeably absent during all our discussions (including the previous slash of miner rewards), so I think it’s hard if they don’t show up to vote.
Given that the change is already in place with overall support from the community and ecosystem, I don’t think we should be meddling with tokenomics any further. The main concern now is the sustainability of the current consensus model when tail emission hits and we have to discuss seriously what that looks like given the sharp drop in emissions when tail emission hits.
4 Likes
thanks for the response
i too believe that’s firo true power will come when good Dex’s are available and when firo get the security from de-listing then firo can remove transparent side
but i worry about the tail emissions if too high may give bad signal to market like grin
or else firo need very high adoption so even 1 firo tail emissions won’t effect much
and that’s the tough part
and everything does not always happens according to plan
1 Like