Higher firo price in a staking coin is not attractive to new people. Nobody wants to be late in a ponzi.
PoW ensures the price is true, and newcomers are relatively safe to buy in.
1 Like
- I just also want to emphasize the same flux and equilibrium will also happen with masternodes if reward distribution is weighted to nodes.
-
Additional rewards attract investment and the number of nodes increases.
-
As more nodes come on line, APR will reduce. For example, lets say from 20% back down to around 11-15%.
-
The masternode network will become larger and more resilient, and the most critical aspect of Firo’s security will be hardened.
-
A side effect of increased masternode demand, is increased demand for Firo. Existing node owners will also be less likely to sell nodes during periods of price appreciation. As increased demand and reduced sell pressure collide, this will increase the price of Firo.
-
As the community sees this price appreciation, and attributes it to the fundamental changes (as well as impressive Dev progress), they will feel more confident about the project as a whole, and will be less likely to sell.
-
The project will attract network growth as new users see potential in the project. This further places demand on Firo and supports price. This further increases confidence for all involved in Firo. From the nodes, the miners and the holders. As well as appearing much more attractive to the wider 3rd party infrastructure. i.e. wallets, exchanges, other chains and bridges.
-
With a higher Firo price comes a higher Dev budget. With a higher Dev budget comes accelerated development, accelerated opportunities for collaborations. Again it will also attract additional network growth as new users become exposed to the joys of Firo’s impressive technology.
-
The above will continue to feed into a positive feedback loop. We have a shot of making it into the big leagues. Confidence begets confidence and the project with its current great leadership will only continue to grow.
-
Then comes the inevitable crash. It’s going to happen, make no mistake about it. However I damn well would prefer we have an epic crash from $300 to $30, than remain at $3.
-
With the epic crash, comes the smart money. The type that see value and long term opportunity. Slowly but surely price will begin to climb again.
-
Lastly with such overall community confidence (some such as like Bitcoin, will be declaring Firo dead) and longterm opportunity, I sure as shit will be holding all the way through. You see it’s easy to hold a coin you when you believe in its mission. It’s easier still when you are confident about its long term success.
2 Likes
POW doesn’t make price true as you only consider price in mining cost, but as I mentioned above Firo has incredible amount of development going in, so you cannot compare it with crypto without any research or development work.
Also in other words you saying price of Bitcoin should be zero, once all coins will be distributed and you cannot mine new one.
Time has changed and in some projects mining is not 100% of what is going on.
1 Like
The killer app of PoW is ensuring real price.
As at least some of the miners are forced to sell.
That’s not true. In same logic Nike shoes should cost only 1 USD if they will have to pay only those children who made them and material cost. But people pay more for them because there is some perceived value behind made by branding and social acceptance.
Same way some crypto’s value should be based more on utility, development team and superior technology behind it other then on cost of labor to mine it.
2 Likes
This debate is enriched by the testimony of everyone: they are all welcome.
But we must think at the overall level of the project, not at the level of the particular interest of one or another member of the community.
When making a decision, it is the general interest, that of the Firo project, that of the entire Firo community, which must be above the particular interest of this or that party (masternodes, miners , team, community).
Some data on the history of our ZCoin/Firo project (source: coinmarketcap)
. 2018 first week, 1 ZCoin (Firo) : 687,900 satoshis/94.17 € (top 89)
. 2019 first week, 1 ZCoin (Firo) : 136,700 satoshis/4.88 € (top 100)
. 2020 first week, 1 ZCoin (Firo): 43,720 satoshis/2.90 € (top 144)
. 2021 first week, 1 Firo: 8.828 satoshis/€2.36 (top 195)
. 2022 first week, 1 Firo: 11,420 satoshis/€4.76 (top 540)
Things are clear, in 5 years, Firo has gone from an innovative project full of promises to a failure : if we don’t react quickly and strongly, we will become a shitcoin !
- price fall in satoshis over 5 years : -98.34%!
- price fall in euros over 5 years : -94.95%!
- top ranking fall over 5 years : top 89 to top 540 = -451 places!
These figures are extremely violent : despite the technical performance of the Firo coin, its price and rank continue to drop dizzily. it’s a fail !
We must react and the time is not for compromises that will not solve anything : we need solutions built on rigorous reasoning.
Why Firo price over 5 years has fallen by more than 98% in bitcoin and almost 95% in euros ? Why has Firo gone from 89 market place rank to the 451e in 5 years?
The reason is simple: there are more Firo sellers in the markets than Firo buyers. We must therefore promote the purchase of Frio and curb the sale of Firo.
The block reward repartition is an extremely simple and relevant way to act on the Firo purchases and sales.
The only decision to be made is therefore to distribute more Firo to actors who buy and keep their Firo (masternodes owners) than to actors who do not buy and sell them (miners, team, community fund : see previous posts). When I say “more”, it’s not 51%, it’s “significantly more”, at least 60% for the masternodes (therefore maximum 40% for the miners/team/community set).
Firo bloc-reward repartition :
60% → Masternodes
20% + transaction fees → Miners
15% → development fund
05% → community fund (for a first try)
This distribution shocks some miners (not all of them, I am also a miner) who are focused on their short-term personal interest. But these miners are opportunities and have no loyalty to the Firo project (it’s their right, no criticism from me: especially if we encourage this behavior by giving them a large share of the reward block). Those who wish to promote the Firo project in the long term understand that the support of the Firo prize is also in their interest (see previous posts, include others contributors).
I write this without worrying about my personal interest as masternode owner and miner, or even potential future beneficiary of the “cimmunity fund” (who knows ?) or member of the Firo team (which I am not). My only goal is to get the Firo project back on the path to success, which will benefit the entire Firo community (therefore also me): masternode holders, miners, team, community fund.
Hoping to see a Firo at 0.009 btc again… and beyond 
3 Likes
I think Reuben’s latest percentages provide the safest split - and they can be reviewed again before the next halving:
Reuben’s latest suggestion:
35% + tx fees Miners
45% Masternodes
15% Dev Fund
5% Community Fund
I have no personal preference since I’m both a miner and a MN owner - and believe a safe balanced approach will benefit Firo the most. I have already outlined the risks and reasons for a similar percentage split in a previous post (basically maintaining enough miner capability to help secure the network and reduce risk).
2 Likes
The question is if reducing from 50 to 35 makes the difference? And if it doesn’t help much will we need to have another discussion in few months to reduce it more?
1 Like
To encourage use of the fund too and to prevent it from being accumulated we can also make it such that the default is that any unused funds is publicly destroyed, reducing our supply if there are no worthy use cases.
1 Like
Even without mentioning the phenomena of difficulty and price that will balance the profitability of mining, there will always be miners for Firo if it remains a quality project that does not continue to want to fill a leaky barrel with its reward block:
- Minors, like some of us, who support the project.
- Miners who do not pay for their electricity or who pay a very low price for it: there are more of these miners than you might think.
A 45% masternode reward leaves 55% of the reward block to sellers: Firo turns out to be down. It is necessary to greatly exceed 50% to have an action on the rise in the price and 60% for masternodes is a minimum. Incidentally, this puts the remuneration of the masternodes in better coherence with the importance of their role in the Firo security. We only have 4,000 masternodes left, we had double of that before the last halving: do you really want to end up with only 2,000 masternodes at the next halving?
Reuebn’s idea of destroying funds from community fund if they are not used is interesting. The problem is always the same: who decides, who controls and how to protect against misappropriation? This seems complicated to do in practice. As for the price action of Firo, it will be very limited since it is only for possibly unused part of 5% of the bloc reward…
It takes long-term firo buyers and masternode holders (or future masternode holders) are the only ones we know today. All the other actors are potential Firo short-term sellers: traders, miners, team and community fund.
The correct block reward distribution is the only way we have at the moment to reduce Firo sales and encourage Firo buyers. There must be more buyers than sellers, so the reward block must be distributed with more Firo allocated to the masternodes than to all the other players.
1 Like
Firo inhabits a very dynamic and challenging environment. Indeed, it requires many things to be accomplished simultaneously, albeit with limited resources. Firstly, the blockchain developer’s compensation in the current market has increased threefold in the last four years. Based on an estimation of developmental rewards at the current rate, it feels as if they are working with us due to the nature of the project in privacy fields as opposed to initiating an easy money grab by working with other projects like Defi. Secondly, Firo has been trying to foster a community to become like Bitcoin without requiring the owner and acquisition system to be decentralized; however, six years on, the community has still not reached the stage that was initially envisaged. Community funds will play a significant role in the current setting to help Firo successfully reach its initial goal by offering opportunities to the community to participate. The development team will simultaneously focus on delivering Firo’s infrastructure, such as core wallet and full-node software. After initial analysis, to manage the fund, I propose for the community committee to be reelected every six months; the fund left after six months will then be burned or auctioned with a stable coin such as USDT or USDC, and vested the auctioned Firo for at least a year from the buyer. Thirdly, I have discovered how research on new privacy protocols takes time and expenditure. As Firo’s mission is to preserve privacy in this technological age for digital currency, it is reasonable to separate costings from the development reward and instead allocate accordingly to specific research by creating a Privacy Lab at Firo. Finally, I propose a reduction in the miner and masternodes portion and for them to be reallocated to the community, research, and development.
Development: 15% (Still the same)
Masternode: 30% (Reduced from 35%)
Research: 5%
Miner: 10%
Community: 40%
If the Firo community and associated research reach a particular stage, it would be prudent to revise the tokenomic structure to achieve a more favorable future environment.
2 Likes
Well, how can you guarantee those who hold masternodes will not sell it?
Sound good. Although masternode rewards will reduce it seems good for the project as whole.
Also if possible, those unused community resources could be kept and used for some kind of masternode rewards after next halving if it will he needed instead of selling them now.
I cannot guarantee anything on this subject: it is about the fundamentals of each player in the block-reward.
Some masternode owners will sell their rewards at times, and even the collateral. Just as some miners will sometimes keep their reward.
In any case, masternode owners have at least 1,000 Firo that they have bought and have not sold: they keep these 1,000 Firo as long as their masternode suits them (it’s up to us to make sure it lasts as long as possible possible: pay attention to the next halving).
On the other hand, a miner does not buy his mined Firo on the market: he does not participate directly in the request to buy Firo (he pushes the hashrate and the difficulty upwards). A miner has no reason to keep his Firo, especially with the fall in the price for 5 years (-98%): he has every interest in selling his Firo to secure his gains.
Overall, masternode owners are therefore similar to holders and minors to sellers (without judgment on my part).
My posts are already generally too long, I do not specify all these aspects each time, but you were right to ask me the question.
Thank you Poramin for your opinion: it is important that the most members of the team express themselves (and the most people in the community).
Here is your proposal:
Development: 15% (Still the same)
Masternodes: 30% (Reduced from 35%)
Research: 5%
Mining: 10%
Community: 40%
It’s very original and it’s largely based (40%) on an ideal community that still doesn’t exist after 6 years. I hope that one day it will exist, but I try to be pragmatic.
For the moment, the Firo community is Firo owners who have been losing money every years for 6 years. Whose fault is it ?
- the team might think that the “community” did not help it enough: but this community does not exist
- Firo owners might think that the team doesn’t always make the right decisions.
Today, we have to make a decision and your proposal on the distribution of the block reward seems dangerous to me: distribute only 30+10% of the reward block to those who finance the project, it is to believe that people will continue indefinitely to finance the project at a loss.
About crypto communities:
I only know one crypto that can claim to have a real community: it’s Bitcoin. All the other altcoin communities are in fact only the temporary gathering of speculative interests: as soon as a cloud arrives, everyone flees (ETH, Defi, NFT…). Bitcoin does not have any “community fund”. It is not by creating a community fund that you will create a community.
About crypto communities (continued):
The Bitcoin community provides development, research and all other tasks, without any funding from the block-reward: that’s the definition of a community.
The day there will be a real community around Firo, there will no longer be a need for funding from the block reward of development, research or a community fund.
There is a contradiction between “firo community” and “firo team”.
It is because there is no Firo community, even after 6 years, that there is a need to finance a Firo team. It may be because there is funding for a Firo team that there is no Firo community… but that is another story.
Wanting to finance both a Firo team and a Firo community with the block reward is a contradiction.
1 Like
Actually I don’t agree with this. Bitcoin development for a project its size is incredibly slow and they have lost many developers due to lack of funding. Some may say this is a feature and it has huge first mover and Lindy effect advantage but it isn’t because of its development.
You can see who funds these developments and many of them have vested interests to make it happen. There’s only a handful namely Blockstream, Lightning Labs and Chaincode which are VC backed.
Compare this with Ethereum which has Gitcoin funding and also grants from the Ethereum Foundation which had raised a huge amount of money from ICO along with projects building on them that contribute back.
2 Likes
Agreement on the solution is impossible if there is not common agreement on the problem.
The problem as I understand from the thread:
- Terminal price decline, down 98% in 6 years
- Lack of community engagement
The solution to the first has been well explained. Decrease selling pressure and incentivize hodlers by shifting weight of block rewards from miners to MNs. Makes sense. It seems obvious that more than 50% must be distributed to hodlers to have any impact on price over time.
Community engagement. Very good points above about the BTC community. I can feel that. I set up a Pi and run a BTC node for no other reason than to participate in the community. It cost money to buy, time to set up and a little bit of energy to run 24/7. But I love participating. I do not need to be paid . Its cool. I love my little BTC node.
The dev fund is a great idea and I’d hate to see it burned. It should not be wasted or burned, but hodled until there is another cool innovation to pay people to develop/market etc. Money spent on developing is technically sell pressure, yes, but better viewed as an investment.
3 Likes
Remember the purpose of the community fund (at least in my original plan) is also to slowly phase off the development fund. Note that while I’m the Project Steward and Poramin is the co-founder our opinions are our own and even among ourselves have differing views on how to approach it.
Poramin wants to create a huge community fund right off the bat while I prefer a slow phase in to educate and transition. My view is that if we don’t start now, it would never happen and we are at a point that we should try something new.
The goal of any core team especially of a privacy coin would be to go the way of Satoshi.
6 Likes
Yes, Reuben: Bitcoin support is provided primarily by people/organizations who have a vested interest in seeing Bitcoin succeed. And it is this success that secures their remuneration, not the block reward. Why isn’t it the same for Firo?
You cite ETH as an example of a project whose developers are funded independently of the price of ETH (via the foundation). As you say, ETH did an ICO, not ZCoin/Firo, so this method of financing does not apply to Firo.
It is therefore only the increase in the price of Firo that should finance Firo, not the capture of an ever greater share of the block-reward to compensate for the fall in the price of Firo. The Firo team should have a vested interest in increasing Firo’s price, not in capturing a larger share of the block-reward.
The function of the block-reward is to ensure the security of the blockchain (role mainly played by masternodes today in Firo), not the financing of the project. Ensuring the financing of the team with part of the reward block is a solution that should be temporary, especially since the reward block will cease one day (day when the security of the blockchain will have to be financed by transaction fees).