Your fanciful white paper projects a massive production and value for your coin with no indication other than faith in you and your systems to back it up.
You have repeatedly disdained farmers, claiming that you will make the coin so valuable that their 20% will be more than worth the effort of farming. Bullcrap again.
POST is basically a failure but you claim that you and your systems and flowery made up projections will make a new Chia fork that performs like Superman.
You do not have a company for people to invest in. You are asking for personal, unsecured loans to launch your dream. How can you do “due diligence” when you do not even have a corporation?
You are a dreamer trying to involve others in your LARP while having them pay for it.
Do you seriously think 20% is very different from 50% as in Chia? If you get double the rewards, then what? Remember that price has a log-normal distribution and different project characteristics can result in cryptocurrencies differ hundreds to thousands of times in value. For other points, I don’t think they are worth arguing.
Additionally, the profitability of farmers mainly come from the competition between other farmers, not even related to the proportion of coins allocated to farmers.
Bitcoin gives 100% of new coins to farmers, and has done so for it’s entire existence.
Yet it’s been adopted by more companies and people than ANY OTHER COIN.
YOU are the one making the false assumption here - that farmers are going to HOLD ON to the coin.
The situation was very different. Early Bitcoin miners were also technical experts that could help with any development problems. So, Bitcoin even though technically only rewarded miners, most Bitcoin were distributed to experts and enthusiasts that drove its later development and adoption. Additionally, there was no competitors for Bitcoin. Nowadays, miners/farmers are mostly here just for the money. A coin that allocates to mostly farmers/miners is a coin that would quickly die. Finally, if we want to replicate Bitcoin, why wouldn’t we just buy and hold Bitcoin? It is a very good cryptocurrency. A new cryptocurrency necessarily needs to solve a different problem that Bitcoin does.
The only problem I have with Bitcoin is that it only allocates to miners and prevents most people from the wealth it creates. Image scientists that devote their life to find cures for diseases and promote human health, they are unfortunately likely among the last ones to adopt Bitcoin. Do you think it is a fair system socially speaking? Because of this, it has been more than a decade and the adoption of Bitcoin is still low with limited social impact. But the Bitcoin revolution could do much more than this, because it is the first attempt to let the society run on a good rule of law that is objectively enforceable by machines. Our current world is a mess, often unfair, illy formed, and a significant part of it comes from the lack of rule of law or the corruption of rule of law. I think it is our responsibility to image, create, and adopt a different and better set of rule of law based on the revolution Bitcoin brings. This necessarily means that we need to distribute the token much more broadly than to a small group of farmers so that even average Joe can have a share, and the token flow must necessarily bring good for the society. In our case, what it brings to the promotion of innovation that is the foundation for modern society. So, I don’t see another way around and farmers must view themselves as service providers of the system and therefore only take 20% of it.
Hint - most people aren’t miners at all, and a lot don’t TRUST Cryptocoins due to the level of scams, like the one YOU are promoting.
As for “scientists that devote their life to find cures”, reference coins like Curecoin (that supports Foldin@Home) and Gridcoin (that supports SOME projects on BOINC).
It is bloody RARE for any cryptocoin to distribute significant amounts to anyone BUT the miners (farmers) of that coin - yet many of them have success levels that have blown CHIA completely out of the water, and virtually ALL of the ones that only allocate a “percentage to the miners” have turned out to be scams or just flat out failed (some have not entirely failed yet, like Chia).
The whole concept of “farmers must view themselves as service providers for the system” is totally flawed and VERY communistic at best.
BTW - ALL of the coins that have succeeded in any serious way have “allocated mostly (OR ENTIRELY) to the farmer”. 100% of them.
And as a hint - MANY early Bitcoin miners did NOTHING to help with developmental problems OR were “technical experts” - along with the fact that Bitcoin didn’t start seeing SERIOUS success 'til well after LiteCoin (and a few of the other early coins like X11) existed, so it DID in fact have competition.
As I said, if you think Bitcoin tokenomics is the best, why don’t you simply promote Bitcoin? I guess that is because you are late to the party of Bitcoin and are therefore not motivated to do so. In the Chia community, we also have forks that allocate all coins to farmers, but they are now pretty much dead. Why don’t you promote all these coins? I hope you can see how far away you are from reality. Instead of sitting in front of a computer, you can go on the street to ask average people, do they think whether it is better to reward a cryptocurrency to only a bunch of computer nerds, or is it better to reward of a broader community including them? If you tend to call some clearly described project scams, I will remind you that most people still think that all cryptocurrencies are scams. Try to figure out why.
