It is currently 15 Nov 2018 19:40

Kredits (XKR)

COMMUNITY INITIATIVE BRINGING NEW LIFE TO KWAGSH

Emission Logic for XKR

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 27 Sep 2018 15:32

Hello everyone,
In an effort to avoid the coin hemorrhage seen in KGH where 65% of the coins had already been emitted and banked in just a few wallets within 6 months, we need to discuss the emission logic for Kredits to ensure from the start a long life coin and project.
Below you will find sample emission curves showing supply vs time and based against the BTC emission curve for reference. My preference is for the third example. A curve of 21 is a good standard with enough coins at the start and a steady supply on a 30 year lifetime.
Please give your thoughts as to which, if any would make sense.

This one is roughly the curve of KGH 1.0
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.44.33.png
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.44.33.png (21.6 KiB) Viewed 366 times

Emission Curve 20
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.42.09.png
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.42.09.png (36.71 KiB) Viewed 366 times

Emission Curve 21
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.38.40.png
Screenshot-2018-09-27_10.38.40.png (45.66 KiB) Viewed 366 times

 
Posts: 81
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 05:12

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Ough » 27 Sep 2018 15:59

AverageCitizen wrote:coin hemorrhage seen in KGH where 65% of the coins had already been emitted and banked in just a few wallets within 6 months
It is indeed bad on the old legacy chain. Not sure what the original developer was thinking, or if he just didn't understand the implications, but as of today we actually have 68.5% of the total coin supply mined.

That first chart, with emission curve at 18, is just crazy. Seeing it visualized like this sums up the main problem of KGH supply in one image.

For the relaunch, I had 19 in mind (or maybe 20), rather than 21, because we are miners and we like to get coins. Something like half of total coin supply getting mined in the first four years is a comfortable spot, I'd think.

 
Posts: 56
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 23:57

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Karsen » 27 Sep 2018 18:57

Has i've said before, we are making these assumptions with the 68 % in mind, we should do a pre swap before making drastic changes, or at least a survey to know where we stand, seeing that alot of the mined coins could have been abandoned and wallets deleted, at the moment there's no way of knowing for sure, in case we stand close to the current mined supply i would say halving would be the way to go, and increasing the difficulty, by alot.

We can't simply forget the last 6 months of mining, and go back to the begining, by that logic we would be better off, creating a completly new coin, because it would be the same.

Obviously, i'm a miner has alot of other people here, and i do have a considerable large stash, we are here to make profit but i also want the coin to thrive, in order to do both halving might be the best case scenario, there will be massive losses on everyone, but it's the most logical path to ensure both profits and a good coin.

If the supply was to be halved we would stand at 34% of the current supply, not forgeting what i mentioned before, if there was a large ammount of lost coins that would be even lower, let's imagine that only 50 % of the coins were claimed, that would cut the current supply to 25 % in the first 6 months, we could then consider an emission rate of 18 or 19.

Now let's imagine a scenario where only 30 - 40 % (It can always be lower) of the coins are swapped and we halved it, we would stand at 15 - 20 % of the current supply, and we could then consider an emission rate of 20.

And so on, this theory would require unused coin's to be returned to the chain in a pre swap

In my opinion we can't decide until we know the ammount to be swapped, at least that's my opinion.

 
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Sep 2018 15:15

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by S7nAcks » 28 Sep 2018 00:20

I think we need to consider the emission rate/block rewards and swap ratio together. Say for easy numbers you mined 1,000,000 coins over the past few months. At 1000:1 swap ratio, you end up with 1,000 coins. If the new emission rate/block rewards allow you to mine 1,000 coins a day (assuming you use the same hash rate) that would mean all the work you did over the past few months is worth 1 day of mining on the new coin. Setting the emission rate/block rewards so you are mining 100 coins a day would make more sense as now the coins you mined prior are worth 10 days of mining on the new coin. Again these numbers are for demonstration only to show why we should consider all aspects together.

I'm not opposed to a high swap ratio as long as it doesn't completely wipe out the work we did on the old coin mining compared to the new emission rates. Otherwise, it's not a relaunch, but it would be more of a new coin launch.

 
Posts: 32
Joined: 07 Sep 2018 23:56

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageJoe » 28 Sep 2018 03:49

S7nAcks wrote: Otherwise, it's not a relaunch, but it would be more of a new coin launch.

Completely agree. Try to stay the same. If something is bad, fix it. Improve on the original. We need to fix the emission curve. But don't change everything. Just fix what is wrong.

 
Posts: 56
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 23:57

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Karsen » 29 Sep 2018 17:07

1000:1 will make the previous 6 months of mining worthless to alot of people considering the power they spent, 2:1, 3:1, 4:1 is the most acceptable range of swap.

2:1 = 34 % mined (Without the swapped coins that could return to the chain if they were unclaimed, with could be much lower)
3:1 = 22% mined (Same situation has above)
4:1 = 17% mined (Same situation has above)

Now let's imagine only 50 % of the coins are claimed during the swap and the rest is returned to the chain

2:1 = 25 % mined
3:1 = 16.67 % mined
4:1 = 12.5 % mined

And would boost the price by alot

this would potentially make the coin worth 5-10 sat short term without creating to many walls

let's imagine 2:1 of 1 B that would be 500K at 10 sat would be worth = 250 K
let's imagine 1000:1 of 1 B that would be 1M at 10 000 sat would be worth = 500K

Do you really think this coin could reach 10 000 sat easier than 10 sat? Seeing the supply is the same, even with a massive difficulty increase it would never reach 10 000 sat, just look at BCN the difficulty is pretty much what you are proposing, it reached 200 sat after 3 Years if i'm not mistaken, it never reached even close 10 000 sat.

Just look at Worktips with double the supply and pretty much the same circulating supply that we have at the moment reached 1 sat, now imagina this one at 2/3 times less current supply than that, with a difficulty alot higher, it could easily reach the 10 sat range

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 30 Sep 2018 13:13

Karsen wrote:1000:1 will make the previous 6 months of mining worthless to alot of people considering the power they spent, 2:1, 3:1, 4:1 is the most acceptable range of swap.

2:1 = 34 % mined (Without the swapped coins that could return to the chain if they were unclaimed, with could be much lower)
3:1 = 22% mined (Same situation has above)
4:1 = 17% mined (Same situation has above)

Now let's imagine only 50 % of the coins are claimed during the swap and the rest is returned to the chain

2:1 = 25 % mined
3:1 = 16.67 % mined
4:1 = 12.5 % mined

And would boost the price by alot

this would potentially make the coin worth 5-10 sat short term without creating to many walls

let's imagine 2:1 of 1 B that would be 500K at 10 sat would be worth = 250 K
let's imagine 1000:1 of 1 B that would be 1M at 10 000 sat would be worth = 500K

Do you really think this coin could reach 10 000 sat easier than 10 sat? Seeing the supply is the same, even with a massive difficulty increase it would never reach 10 000 sat, just look at BCN the difficulty is pretty much what you are proposing, it reached 200 sat after 3 Years if i'm not mistaken, it never reached even close 10 000 sat.

Just look at Worktips with double the supply and pretty much the same circulating supply that we have at the moment reached 1 sat, now imagina this one at 2/3 times less current supply than that, with a difficulty alot higher, it could easily reach the 10 sat range



Good thinking. I was looking forward and not back regarding the time and mining power costs previously used. So with the current mined KGH coins at over 68 percent. Which do you feel is a better option? 2:1 or 3:1. Using the absolute number of 68,715,299,000 coins as of 27/9 @ 2:1 would be 34357649500 XKR paid out in swap or 3:1 @ 22905099666 XKR in swap. Strictly speaking as a miner, 2:1 is fine but 3:1 gives more longevity to the chain keeping more XKR available . My concern is that new miners would be put off by high swap numbers. As always these are referrence numbers but put the amounts in perspective.
I also agree with S7nAcks that we can't pin down solid numbers until we have all the information; specifically how many coins will be active in the swap. That's a variable we require.

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 30 Sep 2018 13:35

oooouhhgh wrote:
AverageCitizen wrote:coin hemorrhage seen in KGH where 65% of the coins had already been emitted and banked in just a few wallets within 6 months
It is indeed bad on the old legacy chain. Not sure what the original developer was thinking, or if he just didn't understand the implications, but as of today we actually have 68.5% of the total coin supply mined.

That first chart, with emission curve at 18, is just crazy. Seeing it visualized like this sums up the main problem of KGH supply in one image.

For the relaunch, I had 19 in mind (or maybe 20), rather than 21, because we are miners and we like to get coins. Something like half of total coin supply getting mined in the first four years is a comfortable spot, I'd think.


I think 20 may be the way to go. Are we considering a different diff target? Below are emission speeds of 20 with various diff targets. 60, 120, 180.
Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.24.45.png
Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.24.45.png (22.45 KiB) Viewed 306 times

Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.22.47.png
Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.22.47.png (23.26 KiB) Viewed 306 times

Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.25.50.png
Screenshot-2018-09-30_09.25.50.png (21.91 KiB) Viewed 306 times

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 30 Sep 2018 14:14

Here is a better calc to check use. It would be more accurate.
http://forknote.net/create/#/

 
Posts: 56
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 23:57

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Karsen » 30 Sep 2018 18:26

I agree we can't decide until we have more information, but yeah a 20 emission rate, perhaps with a 180 difficulty target, but the choice should lay somewhere between the 2:1 to 4:1.

In my opinion more between 2:1 or 3:1, perhaps 3:1 giving the coin more longevity, like you said, seeing that the % from 3:1 to 4:1 isn't that different, and may not be worth it.

If i'm not mistaken Ough was gonna make a survey to determine how many coins the active people have, that information would give us something to work with at least.

Something i think should come into this discussion, is the unclaimed coins use, my suggestion would be do a pre swap, and determine the exact number of coins to be swapped, and the ones that aren't claimed a small percentage of them could yes be reutilized for another uses, but the rest we should return them to the chain, reducing the % mined, and allowing them to be mined again, effectivly reducing the overall % mined

 
Posts: 12
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 19:37

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by ZeilerCD » 01 Oct 2018 12:48

Yes, a survey of those that respond to see what coins are out there and LIKELY to be swapped would help decision a lot ;)

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 01 Oct 2018 22:53

Karsen wrote:I agree we can't decide until we have more information, but yeah a 20 emission rate, perhaps with a 180 difficulty target, but the choice should lay somewhere between the 2:1 to 4:1.

In my opinion more between 2:1 or 3:1, perhaps 3:1 giving the coin more longevity, like you said, seeing that the % from 3:1 to 4:1 isn't that different, and may not be worth it.

If i'm not mistaken Ough was gonna make a survey to determine how many coins the active people have, that information would give us something to work with at least.

Something i think should come into this discussion, is the unclaimed coins use, my suggestion would be do a pre swap, and determine the exact number of coins to be swapped, and the ones that aren't claimed a small percentage of them could yes be reutilized for another uses, but the rest we should return them to the chain, reducing the % mined, and allowing them to be mined again, effectivly reducing the overall % mined


A preswap or even the whole swap idea right at the moment is temporarily untenable due to altex.exchange vanishing. Whether it was pure coincidence or not is a mute point. Personally, I lean towards the "or not" camp. The end result is same. Many miners just saw their swap holdings evaporate. I also have a concern that these pilfered coins will end up in 1 wallet or a small group and used to gain more Kredits during the swap.

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 02 Oct 2018 01:11

The first graph is Kredits as if a reboot only (no swap/no premine). Based on emission speed 20/difficulty target 180.
Screenshot-2018-10-01_09.21.12.png
Screenshot-2018-10-01_09.21.12.png (48.56 KiB) Viewed 280 times

***These figures are calculated on the basis of feasible 75 billion KGH mined at time of XKR launch AND A 100% swap.***
Kredits as if reboot with swap and premine swap fund @ 4:1 swap. Based on emission speed 20/difficulty target 180 and assumption of 75% total supply KGH mined at time of XKR launch. The value was accurately 18.74% but I rounded it to 20 for easier conceptualization.
Screenshot-2018-10-01_09.21.12.png
Screenshot-2018-10-01_09.21.12.png (48.56 KiB) Viewed 280 times

Last graph indicates Kredits as if reboot with swap and premine swap fund @ 3:1 swap. Based on emission speed 20/difficulty target 180 and assumption of 75% total supply KGH mined at time of XKR launch
Screenshot-2018-10-01_18.05.53_1-3swap.png
Screenshot-2018-10-01_18.05.53_1-3swap.png (54.96 KiB) Viewed 280 times
Attachments
Screenshot-2018-10-01_18.05.53_1-4swap.png
Screenshot-2018-10-01_18.05.53_1-4swap.png (54.7 KiB) Viewed 280 times

 
Posts: 32
Joined: 07 Sep 2018 23:56

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageJoe » 02 Oct 2018 03:02

Thank you @AverageCitizen for everything you do.

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 02 Oct 2018 13:34

AverageJoe wrote:Thank you @AverageCitizen for everything you do.

Any thanks gets spread all around. We all do what we can. :)

 
Posts: 56
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 23:57

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Karsen » 02 Oct 2018 17:48

I haven't checked much on altex lately, but i'm inclined to agree with you, it was really coincidental, but even if it wasn't, i wouldn't be surprised if those lost coins, would eventually turn up again, not only on kredits but on alot of other coins.

Really apreciate your effort AverageCitizen, a really good job.

Just a small question, i could be wrong, has i haven't worked with these kind of graphics that much, but appart from the no swap, and the 4:1 graphs that are really good, shouldn't the 3:1 graphs use a 25 % of the premined in the calculations, instead of the 20 % from the 4:1?

 
Posts: 27
Joined: 17 Sep 2018 00:58
Location: Southern United States

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by AverageCitizen » 02 Oct 2018 21:41

Karsen wrote:I haven't checked much on altex lately, but i'm inclined to agree with you, it was really coincidental, but even if it wasn't, i wouldn't be surprised if those lost coins, would eventually turn up again, not only on kredits but on alot of other coins.

Really apreciate your effort AverageCitizen, a really good job.

Just a small question, i could be wrong, has i haven't worked with these kind of graphics that much, but appart from the no swap, and the 4:1 graphs that are really good, shouldn't the 3:1 graphs use a 25 % of the premined in the calculations, instead of the 20 % from the 4:1?


Karsen,
Thank you for catching that error. Here is the corrected 3:1 swap graph.
Screenshot-2018-10-02_17.35.44.png
Screenshot-2018-10-02_17.35.44.png (54.46 KiB) Viewed 261 times

 
Posts: 56
Joined: 06 Sep 2018 23:57

Re: Emission Logic for XKR

Post by Karsen » 02 Oct 2018 21:52

No problem, glad i could help.

Really good job.

Like i said, 3:1 might be preferable than 4:1 seeing that the difference isn't that high, in the coins per block and on the emission, and it will be more costly than rewarding to go from 3:1 to 4:1.

We do need to make a decision fast, seeing that the more time we lose, the bigger mined ammount we will have to work with, so we should probably put it to a vote, if we could avoid reaching the 75% mark even better, but without knowing the full amount to be swapped it's a tricky situation


Return to Development