[POLL] Final Tokenomics and Block Division

Polls
1

When choosing your vote, please ensure that you are considering both polls together rather than as separate unrelated polls. You can post your clarification on why you’re voting a certain way.

These poll options were decided after one round of discussions and narrowing choices and a second round of adding any poll options that the community feels it may have missed out.

Select all your preferred choices and rank them with rank 1 being the option you like the most. If you don’t like an option you can choose to abstain on that option.

在选择投票时，请确保您将两个民意调查放在一起考虑，而不是将其作为不相关的独立民意调查。您可以发布说明，说明您为何以某种方式投票。

这些民意调查选项是在经过一轮讨论和缩小选择范围，以及第二轮添加社区认为可能遗漏的任何民意调查选项后决定的。

选择所有您喜欢的选项并进行排序，排名第一的选项是您最喜欢的选项。如果您不喜欢某个选项，您可以选择放弃该选项。

Oy kullanırken, lütfen her iki anketi ayrı ve ilgisiz anketler olarak değil, birlikte değerlendirdiğinizden emin olun. Neden belirli bir şekilde oy kullandığınıza dair açıklamanızı yayınlayabilirsiniz.

Bu anket seçenekleri, bir tur tartışma ve daraltma seçenekleri ve topluluğun gözden kaçırmış olabileceğini düşündüğü herhangi bir anket seçeneğinin eklendiği ikinci tur sonrasında kararlaştırıldı.

Tercih ettiğiniz tüm seçenekleri seçin ve en çok beğendiğiniz seçenek 1 olacak şekilde sıralayın. Bir seçeneği beğenmezseniz o seçenekten uzak durmayı seçebilirsiniz.

عند اختيار تصويتك، يرجى التأكد من أنك تفكر في الاستطلاعين معًا وليس كاستطلاعين منفصلين غير مرتبطين. يمكنك نشر توضيحك حول سبب تصويتك بطريقة معينة.

تم تحديد خيارات الاستطلاع هذه بعد جولة واحدة من المناقشات وتضييق الخيارات وجولة ثانية لإضافة أي خيارات استطلاع يشعر المجتمع أنه ربما فاتته.

حدد جميع خياراتك المفضلة ورتبها بحيث يكون الترتيب 1 هو الخيار الذي تفضله أكثر. إذا لم يعجبك خيار ما، فيمكنك اختيار الامتناع عن التصويت عليه.

What should Firo’s block division be? (Rank from your preferred to your least preferred)
  • 50% Masternodes 25% Miners 15% Dev 10% Community
  • 70% Masternodes 5% Miners 15% Dev 10% Community
  • 50% Masternodes 50% Miners
  • 70% Masternodes 15% Miners 10% Dev 5% Community
  • 70% Masternodes, 20% Miners, 10% Dev
0 voters
How should Firo’s token emission be? (Rank from your preferred to your least preferred)
  • Option A: Keep Bitcoin halving schedule (status quo). No tail emission
  • Option B: Keep Bitcoin emission schedule but instead of halving, smooth the curve out (more gradual reduction). No tail emission
  • Option C: Keep Bitcoin halving schedule. 1 FIRO tail emission (~1%)
  • Option D: Keep current emission of 6.25 FIRO/block (1,314,000 FIRO/year) until hit max supply 21.4 million. 1 FIRO tail emission. (This completes distribution of supply in another 4-5 years before tail emission)
  • Option E: Option D but no tail emission. Transaction fees only (Probably need merge mining/Proof of Stake or some other setup besides masternodes)
  • Option F: Half as scheduled but keep emission of 3.125 FIRO/block (657,000 FIRO/year) until hit max supply of 21.4 million. 1 FIRO tail emission.
  • Option G: Option F but no tail emission. Transaction fees only.
0 voters

Translation for above options:

  • 选项 A：保持比特币减半计划（现状）。无尾部发行

  • 选项 B：保持比特币发行计划，但不减半，而是平滑曲线（更渐进的减少）。无尾部发行

  • 选项 C：保持比特币减半计划。1 FIRO 尾部发行（~1%）

  • 选项 D：保持当前 6.25 FIRO/区块（1,314,000 FIRO/年）的发行量，直到达到最大供应量 2140 万。1 FIRO 尾部发行。（这将在尾部发行前 4-5 年内完成供应分配）

  • ​​选项 E：选项 D，但没有尾部发行。仅交易费（可能需要合并挖矿/权益证明或主节点以外的其他设置）

  • 选项 F：按计划减半，但保持 3.125 FIRO/区块（657,000 FIRO/年）的发行量，直到达到最大供应量 2140 万。 1 FIRO 尾部排放。

  • 选项 G：选项 F，但没有尾部排放。仅收取交易费。

  • Seçenek A: Bitcoin yarılanma programını koru (statüko). Kuyruk emisyonu yok

  • Seçenek B: Bitcoin emisyon programını koru ancak yarılanma yerine eğriyi yumuşat (daha kademeli azalma). Kuyruk emisyonu yok

  • Seçenek C: Bitcoin yarılanma programını koru. 1 FIRO kuyruk emisyonu (~%1)

  • Seçenek D: Maksimum arz 21,4 milyona ulaşana kadar mevcut 6,25 FIRO/blok emisyonunu (1.314.000 FIRO/yıl) koru. 1 FIRO kuyruk emisyonu. (Bu, kuyruk emisyonundan önce arzın dağıtımını 4-5 yıl daha tamamlar)

  • Seçenek E: Seçenek D ancak kuyruk emisyonu yok. Sadece işlem ücretleri (Muhtemelen birleştirme madenciliği/Hisse Kanıtı veya masternode’lar dışında başka bir kurulum gerekir)

  • Seçenek F: Planlandığı gibi yarıya indir ancak maksimum arz 21,4 milyona ulaşana kadar 3,125 FIRO/blok emisyonunu (657.000 FIRO/yıl) koru. 1 FIRO kuyruk emisyonu. * Seçenek G: Seçenek F ancak kuyruk emisyonu yok. Sadece işlem ücreti.

  • الخيار أ: الحفاظ على جدول تقسيم البيتكوين إلى النصف (الوضع الراهن). لا إصدار ذيل

  • الخيار ب: الحفاظ على جدول تقسيم البيتكوين ولكن بدلاً من التقسيم إلى النصف، قم بتنعيم المنحنى (تخفيض تدريجي أكثر). لا إصدار ذيل

  • الخيار ج: الحفاظ على جدول تقسيم البيتكوين إلى النصف. إصدار ذيل FIRO واحد (~1%)

  • الخيار د: الحفاظ على الإصدار الحالي البالغ 6.25 FIRO/كتلة (1,314,000 FIRO/سنة) حتى الوصول إلى العرض الأقصى 21.4 مليون. إصدار ذيل FIRO واحد. (يكمل هذا توزيع العرض في غضون 4-5 سنوات أخرى قبل إصدار الذيل)

  • الخيار هـ: الخيار د ولكن لا إصدار ذيل. رسوم المعاملات فقط (ربما تحتاج إلى دمج التعدين/إثبات الحصة أو بعض الإعدادات الأخرى إلى جانب العقد الرئيسية)

  • الخيار F: نصف ما هو مقرر ولكن الاحتفاظ بإصدار 3.125 FIRO/كتلة (657000 FIRO/سنة) حتى الوصول إلى الحد الأقصى للإمداد وهو 21.4 مليون. إصدار ذيل FIRO واحد.

  • الخيار G: الخيار F ولكن بدون إصدار ذيل. رسوم المعاملات فقط.

7 Likes
5

Don’t forget to vote on BOTH polls! I see more people voting on the first poll than the second one!

5 Likes
6

Voted. So happy that I just got bumped a tier a few days ago so I could vote.

The current winners were my #1 choice. I think they benefit the chain significantly. It has long been my belief after studying Monero in 2020 that many chains may succumb because of a lack of tail emissions.

3 Likes
7

What is the closing date btw?

2 Likes
8

1 September.

3 Likes
9

I want to draw your attention to the possible and opposing interpretations of this poll.
For example, on the point 50 or 70% for masternodes.
There are 2 choices at 50% and 3 choices at 70%: the votes for 50% are thus concentrated on 2 options while those for 70% are diluted on 3 options.
Thus, at the time of writing.
I weight each answer (for example): +1 for rank 1, +2 for rank 2, +3 for rank 3, +4 for rank 4, +5 for rank 5 and -2.5 for “explicit no” (because 5 possible positives choices and only 1 negative).
The 50% choice gets:
Option 1: (9x5) + (6x4) + (2x3) + (2x2) + (2x1) - (4x2.5) = 71
Option 2: (1x5) + (0x4) + (1x3) + (0x2) + (12x1) - (11x2.5) = -6.5
Total: 64.5
The 70% choice gets:
Option 3: (1x5) + (9x4) + (5x3) + (3x2) + (0x1) - (7x2.5) = 44.5
Option 4: (9x5) + (2x4) + (4x3) + (4x2) + (0x1) - (6x2.5) = 58
Option 5: (3x5) + (2x4) + (4x3) + (6x2) + (1x1) - (9x2.5) = 25.5
Total: 128
So there are twice as many votes in favor of 70% for masternodes than for 50% while the poll, misinterpreted, could make the 50% choice appear to be the winner. The real winner is the 70% choice.

Edit:
If, to balance the choices, I only keep 2 options for the 50% choice and 2 options for the 70% choice, the results are 64.5 for 50% and 102.5 for 70%. The 70% choice still wins by a wide margin (not counting the possible carryovers on the 2 remaining 70% options that the removal of the third 70% option would probably entail).

10

I didn’t quite follow your post but ranked choice voting doesn’t exactly use weightage. It uses the following method:

Here’s how the counting process typically works:

  1. First Round of Counting: All first-choice votes are counted. If a candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, that candidate wins.
  2. No Majority Winner: If no candidate gets more than 50% of the votes in the first round, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated.
  3. Redistribution of Votes: The votes from the eliminated candidate are redistributed to the remaining candidates based on the second choice (or next highest-ranked) preference indicated on those ballots.
  4. Repeat Process: This process of eliminating the candidate with the fewest votes and redistributing their votes continues until one candidate has more than 50% of the votes and is declared the winner.

This system ensures that the winning choice has broad support, as it takes into account voters’ preferences beyond just their first choice. It also reduces the likelihood of a choice winning with only a small plurality of the vote.

The downside is that it may be skewed by people who vote abstain on choices they otherwise might be alright with.

11

It’s my turn not to understand all the subtleties of this method: I imagine that going through the English language doesn’t help.
We’ll see when the results are out if it’s clearer: no point in wasting your time before.

12

We’re investigating a bug where if you change your vote, your vote isn’t reflected. Checking if this is just a caching delay issue or does this mess up the poll.

2 Likes
13

OK, author of the plugin notes the bug but the outcome should be correct though not sure when it triggers the recalculation.

Worse comes to worse we can tabulate it manually since we have the raw data in the database to cross check the final outcome.

1 Like
14

Would be fixed in next Discourse release :slight_smile:

2 Likes
15

My vote does not appear at all neither old or updated.I think poll is not fair. even I have voted at first hours of poll and my vote does not appear at all. there is a big issue with that vote. I am the first one announced about the poll on the telegram groups and even with that my vote does not appeared. I hope you find solution for that, there will be a big transparency issue for that important vote if not done with full transparency policy.

16

Hey its a voter display issue when you change the vote which I reported above. It will be fixed in few days.

The outcome of the poll is correct but the voter display is broken

See thread below

And the GitHub issue

1 Like
18

This is great, do not get me wrong, but… if you were to go 50% to miners somehow, you would make FIRO the most Profitable coin to mine, This would then boost the price, and accelerate the adoption within the crypto community… as so many people would mine it, use it, trade it etc… and would surely without a doubt boost the community around FIRO 100 fold.

Just saying.

20

Hi, we pushed a bug fix for the voter display, can you go into the options and click the expand button (the little arrow pointing down)? You may have to click it a few times due to the number of voters. It should be correct now but tell us if it isn’t.

2 Likes
21

While there are some good miners, I think most GPU miners currently are mercenaries and just mine whatever gives them the highest USD returns. Which is understandable but they do not really add ‘value’ to the community. You can see how many miners are involved in the polls too!

Currently the way to make PoW work to have a positive impact on the project is to use an algorithm that is designed for an ASIC. This way people who buy the ASIC are ‘locked in’ to your coin, similar to a masternode. This is actually against the original principle of what PoW as a way of fair distribution but you can see that all PoW coins now that are doing well are ASIC supported since those that mine are directly tied to the success of the coin while with GPUs, they can switch to whichever coin.

Our PoW is specifically designed to favor GPUs only but most GPU miners are not appreciative of this and instead complain how hot it makes their rigs run (despite they will not be competing with any FPGAs or ASICs).

This actually leads to a monopoly of the ASIC manufacturer of the new supply of the coins. I’ve seen how ASIC manufacturers operate where even they would create a coin from an existing one just to justify the creation of an ASIC (which is not as expensive as you think it is).

1 Like
22

Thanks now I can see my vote.

2 Likes