I was actually was asking about Tail Emissions back in 2018 
3 Likes
These are some great points brought up. It can add to the history of Firo how it went from 21M to 21.4M then 21M again. Bitcoin had some inflation bugs also then promptly went back to the 21M supply. I vote for adjusting to 21M. It’s great we are catching things really early and there is time for discussion before we translate these things to the software. I also vote for tail emissions to take care of all those supporting the chain.
For when and how to settle getting the supply down to 21M I like the idea of when Firo gets closer to “maintenance mode” such as after ProgPow, mobile wallet with Lelantus V2 capabilities, and instant send are deployed and into the wild.
I want to make sure development and research funds (I say have enough saved for 24-30 months for developers and researchers) are secured so that even in a down market, things can continue on. This scenario would play out after the price of Firo raises dramatically. I think $200USD+ per FIRO is a safe number but someone on the team could correct me on that. This could happen as a 3 month campaign for the community to burn coins via Lelantus spending to a burn address and then the team can settle the rest.
I want to restate I like the burn coins campaign after FIRO deploys killer features AND price is high enough for development to continue enough so that burning 400k coins won’t cripple the project. My second vote is the tail emmisions method of settling the number back down to 21M.
4 Likes
Can a vote be held?。。。
I personally think it’s too premature for a vote.
It’s better to have a discussion around the matter for a while so that everyone can have their say and weigh up the pro and cons.
7 Likes
and we could start seeing a big drop in Masternodes with the next halving in 2024
Could you elaborate a bit about why there will be a big drop in masternodes?
1 Like
As it stands the Masternodes are paid only by the block reward. Currently set as 35% of the total block reward ( 4.375 FIRO)
With each halving, the Masternode rewards also halves. So unless the MN owners are all altruistic, it stands to reason that the number for MNs will drop.
Currently, about 35% of the total supply of Firo is kept as collateral in MNs, down from about 65% before the first halving.
Over the years as the block reward halves all the way down to zero, I’d expect the number of MNs to do the same.
3 Likes
如果是超发的 就销毁它 果断的销毁 别问 问就是销毁 保持一致! 
It would just be a cosmetic act, not rly needed. i guess it depends on the work it would be and the security risks.
I personally think mobile wallet with lelantus is the most needed talk team should focus, so if the reducing will take some time away from other milestones, don`t do it 
3 Likes
Before the rebranding I would have been against any change as that merely erodes trust in the concept of immutability and ‘trusting the code’. (Even though it is not the same thing). However, the fears I had about the rebranding have not materialised. The red colour scheme and ‘Firo’ is now an accepted thing and people new to the project can read its history and note its trajectory from the early Zero Coin protocol without a reduction in confidence - quite the contrary - the continual improvement is a good thing when done conservatively and with the users brought on board, which has occured.
So, on this occasion I see a change to the tail end of the emissions to resolve this total supply issue as a good thing. Having a total max supply of 21 million means something, and the changes necessary to achieve it will be forgotten in less than one year. Very few punters new to the project will look hard enough to find it, and those who do will be reassured by the same culture of continual improvement that resulted in Lelantus, the rebranding and all the rest.
3 Likes
I vote to burn it to 21 million…it makes perfect sense why it was raised, but the supply should have been distributed well enough now where we can go back to the common 21 million standard and won’t face questions like “why is it different” then having to reference back to a hack that happened so conceivably long ago that it isn’t even relevant potentially…
2 Likes
A fixed max supply of 21,000,000 would be better. BTC has a lot of eyes on it these days especially new investors. As they realize the scarce supply of coins, they will likely look for lower cap alternatives which have similar supply as BTC.
1 Like
The 400,000 Firo created is about 1.9% of the total supply. This isn’t much - and as stated it has already diluted the supply and been absorbed. This amount has a major impact on how soon the Firo emissions will need to cease. In the original Bitcoin emissions standard it should take over 130+ years for the complete supply to be created - and this would provide a long term decline of mining and master node payments - and give time for the project to figure out other options (POS or tail emissions or other options). If the supply is to be adjusted down by the 400,000 Firo - this would mean that emissions would have to cease after only about 20 years - instead of over 130 - this really needs to be taken into consideration for the long term viability of POW/POS for Firo - and will impact mining, dev, and master node payments.
This seems to be an appropriate time to re-think the original Bitcoin emissions plan - just because the code is based on Bitcoin doesn’t mean everything needs to follow the same path - Firo needs to learn from it’s own experience and the experience of other coins. Maybe the emission model needs to be modified to something similar to Monero - with tail-emissions - with a small stable amount of new coins being created (small inflation of - say - 0.2%) would create an environment where transaction fees may not get out of control like it has with ETH. (plus miners (or POS) and Master nodes would still get payments from newly created coins).
My preference is to keep the max supply at 21.4M - and to start planning for the possibility of tail emissions - since it will take a while to have discussions about tail emissions, whether to have them, and how they should work. Depending on the amount of tail emissions, a decision and change in emissions amount may be required in less than 15 years, and planning would need to start soon.
2 Likes
less supply, higher price. Look bitcoin, it only has 21M from 2008 but nowaday it still hold that supply and become stronger than ever with its tech. So the firo could be version 2 of bitcoin in the future.
1 Like
[Reduce max supply from 21.4 million to 21 million]-----of course! we should!
1 Like
We should correct max supply.
i would do it like this:
- open donation wallet just for this one and set target 0.4 mil.
- post it publicly (so everyone can donate)
- in firo miner add option for donation 1% - 3% that goes into this new wallet.
Once founds has been collected, new fork. No matter how much time this takes, if people waited till now they can a year or two more. We do not want left devs without founds.
2 Likes
I second that. Reduction is just a solution to a problem - it’s not an action taken by a whim. And the method should be as little problematic as it can be.
1 Like
We should face up to the historical problems left over on the project. This is not a decision made on a whim, but a decision made by the entire community for the good development of the project in the future. We are solving problems, not evading.
1 Like
This is irrelevant to the price of firo. To a certain extent, we did not make such a decision for the price, but the community showed its attitude that we accept the problem and cannot solve the problem by destroying the tokens, so we can only do it through tail issuance. Solve the problem, this is a good direction
1 Like
I didn’t say that it is. I was just defending the decision to reduce.
1 Like
If it is excessive, it is recommended to reduce the 400,000. If not reduced, then at will to raise, no one dare to invest
1 Like