Personnaly, I dont think another vote would be needed. I think it would be a waste of time. If its very close, like it is at the moment, it could be :
- Miners - 22.5%
- Masternodes - 55%
- Community fund - 7.5%
- Dev Fund - 15%
5 Likes
I personally would not be opposed to the average or something in-between.
How ever I would respectfully ask that the votes (people) in losing proposals reassess their current vote so that they are included in the options voted on highest.
We are on the same team and I fell (have) no Ill will towards you, forward we march.
1 Like
Fair enough though remember the whole purpose of the 3 votes per person is to allow them to show approval for all the proposals they’re comfortable with.
1 Like
A heads up that this will be the last time an important decision is left to trust level 1 participants. The next round would be Trust Level 2.
Requirements for Trust Level 2 are:
Trust Level 2 – Member
Members keep coming back to your community over a series of weeks; they have not only read, but actively participated long and consistently enough to be trusted with full citizenship.
Get to trust level 2 by…
- Visiting at least 15 days, not sequentially
- Casting at least 1 like
- Receiving at least 1 like
- Replying to at least 3 different topics
- Entering at least 20 topics
- Reading at least 100 posts
- Spend a total of 60 minutes reading posts
4 Likes
We’ll also take this opportunity to drop the block time to 2.5 minutes unless there’s serious opposition.
6 Likes
already voted but if we need to cut the pear in half i’ll would go for something like :
already voted but if we need to cut the pear in half i’ll would go for something like :
- Miners - 22.5%
- Masternodes - 55%
- Community fund - 7.5%
- Dev Fund - 15%
1 Like
There remains a problem: the people who could not put their 3 votes because there are not enough proposals that suit them.
For example, there are only 2 proposals with more than 50% for masternodes while there are as many (2) for 50% and 7 for less than 50%. Those who want more than 50% for masternodes can only vote 2 times instead of 3 times for all others.
In principle, I would be for it.
But this will come at the expense of the blockchain size: what would be the additional increase % of the blockchain with this block-time drop ?
I think the delay caused by a new vote can be avoided.
It all depends on what average is made.
I still think that the 20/60/5/15 distribution is the best compromise for all the reasons already exposed in the topic which deals with the new block-reward distribution.
If a compromise must be found, I remain convinced that it is vital to allocate the maximum of the block-reward to those who buy FIROs on the exchanges and who do not resell them: the masternode holders.
This compromise would be the following:
- Miners = 22.5% block-reward + 100% transaction fees
- Masternodes = 57.5% block-reward
- Community fund = 5% block-reward (trial)
- Dev Fund = 15% block reward
2 Likes
Agree with you, 20/60/5/15 would be great.
2 Likes
I can vote yet because i need to upgrade my trust level, so i’m doing my part and working on it lol
1 Like
Welcome blackmennewstyle on the FIRO forum 
1 Like
1 Like
Hey blackmennewstyle, if you have an account on one of our other mediums (such as Telegram) then I can upgrade your trust level. Feel free to DM me it so I can verify. 
2 Likes
It is easy to get masternodes decentralized, just run active campaing with flux, to move nodes from digital ocean to it.
2 Likes
My thoughts on this are really pretty simple.
1.) Giving more rewards to masternode owners hurts adoption. Although I am not apposed to the reward = the mining reward.
Masternode users hold coins, but what FIRO needs is wider adoption, not more long time loyal holders. It needs users.
2.) Mining rewards on FIRO are already low, I would be surprised if anyone outside of a pool is mining them just to dump them. Their are 10+ coins they could make more money on than FIRO if the purpose was to just mine and dump for USD or BTC. The dumping is probably the pool fee, or the mining software fee, not the miners.
3.) POS is a plutacracy. It is a centralizing force and is unavoidable. All POS coin will become completely centralized on a long enough time frame. It is mathematically impossible to stop.
4.) The Dev fund and the community fund as great ideas and if managed correctly can be huge benefits. However taking rewards from the block reward can be an issue. It’s a great short term solution, but really the project needs to fund itself. I suggest the project itself getting into a few areas that support the project and can be profitable. Examples being, hosting a community mining pool, providing node hosting services, or creating services inside of the FIRO wallet that can generate fee income. For instance, cross chain swaps.
2 Likes
5.) POW is the only way to get non KYC coins.
If you have to KYC to get a privacy coin, what’s the point of it?