The tokenomics change has been live now for nearly a week and the reduction in selling pressure it seems has already had good implications for the coin, whether these two are related i guess we will see over time.
The coin has jumped from #660 to #617 in that time, the community fund has not even been utilised yet too potentially onboard new users. This is fantastic news for the community.
In this time Bitcoin crashed to 17k and we kept a solid floor in what was a heavy crash for the entire industry over the weekend.
I look forward to what the next few months/years will bring to Firo!
Today, and since days/weeks, the result is clear : FIRO price increase since the tokenomics changes, even in this big bear market.
. 2022 mid-may, 1FIRO : 4,670 satoshis/1.25 € (top 700?)
(2022 may 12 : 1 FIRO = 4020 satoshis, source Binance)
. 2022 september 25, 1 FIRO: 15,410 satoshis/€3.02 (top 440).
I am still convinced that monetary creation is still too important towards the actors who tend to sell FIRO without buying them (miners, developement team, community fund).
FIRO should have a distribution mainly directed towards the players who buy they FIROs and tend not to sell them: masternodes owners. As a reminder, Ethereum does this by locking part of its capitalization in its 32 ETHs nodes.
I am therefore still in favor of a minimum distribution of 55% of the block reward to the masternodes, or even 60%.
Yes, no problem with that (“Selling or exchanging is part of being currency.”).
The problem is :
. When you sell or exchange a FIAT, states behind this FIAT is managing the currency (monetary creation, interest rate, economy incentive, taxes…) to do what they want.
. When you sell or exchange a crypto that you have not buy with another cypto or FIAT (for exampe when you earn FIRO with your work [development team], or with electricity [miners]), you are only removing value from this crypto.
. As long as FIRO has not been widely used in a use case, this loss of value will not be compensated by this massive use case and it will be necessary to mainly direct monetary creation towards actors who buy they FIRO with FIAT or others cryptos and hold them (masternodes owners).
I do think that we shouldn’t be changing the tokenomics too often unless there’s a very clear reason backed with evidence to do so.
While I do think the tokenomics change was right and that we had sufficient feedback for it, a part of me is also very cognizant of the fact that we shouldn’t micro-manage this that affects our credibility as a currency. In this way I’m happy that we haven’t made any changes in emission, only distribution.
That being said with the current emission schedule, we need to really think about what happens in a few halvings otherwise masternodes/mining security will decrease. A tail emission is only a partial mitigation to this but I think we need more robust consensus mechanisms that are not dependent on emissions to secure.
There is no rush to change the reward block distribution : I try to learn from the last change and the thoughts that led to it in order to know in which direction to go in the future.
It should be noted that the increase in FIRO price benefits to each actor, including those who were against this solution and demanded its opposite (reduction in the masternode block reward), which would have led to a disaster.