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.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
S7nAcks wrote: Otherwise, it's not a relaunch, but it would be more of a new coin launch.
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
oooouhhgh wrote: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.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
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.
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
AverageJoe wrote:Thank you @AverageCitizen for everything you do.
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?