How Can We Communicate That Decred Isn't Another Pump And Dump?

Discussion in 'Questions' started by pkothbauer, Jan 4, 2016.

  1. 2017/12/15 - Decred v1.1.2 released! → Release Notes  → Downloads
  1. jy-p

    jy-p Sr. Member
    Organizer

    Jan 2, 2016
    133
    340
    Male
    I agree that self-imposed regulations are a fine idea, but the implementation of these regulations, as they have existed previously, is both at odds with how Decred works and technically challenging. Previously existing regulations focus on how many shares of a company can be sold at a given time by insiders, typically putting a cap on their activities to prevent outright pump-and-dump actions on part of the insiders. Implementing these kinds of rules is non-trivial since even the recently activated CLTV from Bitcoin can only lock coins for a fixed amount of time, meaning that the complexities of when an insider can sell still cannot be encoded easily.

    Beyond the technical limitations of existing tools for self-regulation, the launch of Decred requires c0+dev to use their coins to ensure PoS is properly secured. Without the participation of c0+dev coins in PoS mining, it would be substantially easier to manipulate and potentially cripple Decred. As time passes after launch of mainnet, the threat of manipulation becomes less and the coins from the premine become a correspondingly smaller fraction of the total amount available.

    It is certainly possible, in theory, to encode constraints on premined coins, but the technology can only handle very simple use cases at the moment, e.g. lock these coins for N blocks. I expect the infrastructure required to apply constraints like you describe is at least 2 years out.

    In lieu of a working technical solution, participants in the c0+dev pool will be throttling their PoS mining so that it is proportional to the average number of coins locked for tickets, e.g. if 50% of coins besides those held by c0+dev premine are locked at any given time for buying stake tickets, c0+dev will only lock 50% of their coins when buying tickets.
     
  2. sambiohazard

    sambiohazard Sr. Member

    Jan 21, 2016
    844
    372
    No offense but I think what is suggested in first post will backfire & will be seen as a gimmick to hide the scam. Only way to build credibility is to have an informed community, who can do their own research & share it with others. Only way devs can help here is by doing what they do best. I would recommend everyone to read my post BCT thread linked below.
    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1290358.msg13537266#msg13537266

    Thanks :)
     
    Renato Abreu and tacotime like this.
  3. anvoice

    anvoice Member

    Dec 22, 2015
    229
    78
    Male
    I doubt it could backfire, but I believe it's still perfectly credible for everyone to do what they will with their Decred. It's correct that the community/developer symbiosis will in the end decide what is to become of the project. From what I'm seeing so far, there is enough genuine interest and developer dedication to lead the project to success and acceptance over time.
     
    sambiohazard likes this.
  4. sambiohazard

    sambiohazard Sr. Member

    Jan 21, 2016
    844
    372
    I mean pledging something & putting it in genesis block is only symbolic & can't be either enforced or used at later date to prove anything, so it might become a publicity stunt or move to legitimize the scam in a "disbeliever's view" and thus backfire in providing more food to FUDDERS. It all comes down to whether you believe the person or not.
     
  5. anvoice

    anvoice Member

    Dec 22, 2015
    229
    78
    Male
    I didn't read the opening post fully.

    You're right, that would probably backfire.
     
  6. Renato Abreu

    Renato Abreu Jr. Member
    Advocate (Twitter)

    Jan 3, 2016
    252
    45
    Male
    Programador
    Brazil
    Liked, good increasing discussion here and there, these chat I see solid growth decred.

     

Share This Page