MNX - DASH (DarkCoin) Masternode Asset

astro 2015-04-02 15:41:50 UTC #43

In short, yes, the GH method is what we are modeled after. The Masternode address will be public, so people will be able to verify the accuracy of payouts. There will also be the transparency of colored coins for holders, so everyone can verify that we are not issuing more assets than we have the backing for (a crucial problem with cloud mining services).

There are limitations to the PoE, however, because as far as I have been able to research, there is no colored coin implementation for DASH, so there are a few steps that do not appear on the blockchain. The first one is the initial sale, which we wanted to do on coinprism, but the variance between BTC/DASH over the last few weeks made that impossible, so I had to accept DASH directly.

The second limitation is the exchanging of the DASH into btc to generate the dividends. Since we are issuing the dividends in btc because of the colored coins, they must be exchanged, and I don't have a "transparent" method to do that aside from providing detailed records.

In terms of escrow, the coins have to be held in a wallet which is (indirectly) linked to the Masternode, and accessible for payouts, so I'm not sure what definition of "escrow" can be achieved. There would certainly be instant recognition if the coins were removed as the MN would cease to function and would be de-listed as a MN. If anyone has suggestions, I would be more than happy to hear them out, but the only one I have ever come up with would be having a trusted member hold the wallet. The issue there is that specific user would then have to be involved in updates, troubleshooting if a MN went down, any additional node launches, and weekly payouts.

As for who I am, to most I'm a "random person on the internet" I suppose. My identity is not a closely guarded secret, and can be found via some googling using information on different forums. @quigley (as well as a few others) knows my full identity given other projects I've worked with them on, and I'm quite confident he would promptly produce that information if something were to happen. I also have no issue with disclosing that information to any "trusted members" as would be necessary to achieve some peace of mind. I'm not overly concerned with privacy, but just posting your information around the internet is never a good idea, so I'll decline to put that information here

Allen1980s 2015-04-02 16:03:12 UTC #44

Escrowed coins would be a third party's possession of a wallet, but then you would have to employ a known and trusted escrow here in order for that to work and they would be a heavy expense on the payouts each week. This is not an achievable goal. It also incurs additional risk, because everyone would only agree to this if it was a trusted person everyone knew. There are other pros and cons to this.

Identification of the Masternode's DASH address on the blockchain would be one way for people to ensure that the Masternode is still up and active, as well as allowing them to see transaction occurring (yields). Taking the number of coins sent to an exchange would also be trackable, and the conversion rate to BTC would be a simple calculation, based on the time stamp of the transaction, which you can readily post as a screen shot.

Correct.

@quigley is obviously a trusted member of multiple communities. Moreover, to satisfy the requests of the Admins here, you could also disclose this information to @Daffy , @AnimoEsto , or @cyberdexter . Choose an Admin you feel most comfortable with.

Anyone can post whatever they want. It does not make it true however. I would use an Admin and have them verify your personal data, basically certifying you in this capacity. It is the same principle behind certifying a trusted eskrow.

@rdyoung I would look at this as well.

quigley 2015-04-02 16:15:48 UTC #45

Once we have the Masternode address, it becomes at least somewhat transparent, though, yes? The number of coins that leave the MN, at the current exchange rate, minus maintenance fees, divided by 1000 should more-or-less match the payouts, right? It's not perfect transparency, but if something fishy happens, it'll be fairly simple to find it. Posting the exchange rate you get each payout would be helpful, I think.

This isn't a bad idea, if @astro is comfortable with it. A neutral third party's verification should be more than adequate. Additionally, I'll vouch for all three of the names @Allen1980s listed as people I'd trust with my personal information, should the need arise. IIRC, there's a "verified vendor" badge or some such on this forum as well, isn't there?

I can verify @astro, but as I am also a "random internet person", that means little to those that don't already know me as a community member.

astro 2015-04-02 16:19:13 UTC #46

Absolutely, I just wanted to acknowledge the areas I can't provide hard blockchain evidence for.

bitstoned 2015-04-02 16:50:02 UTC #47

there's always http://cryptoasian.com/proof-of-developer-faq/

rdyoung 2015-04-02 16:53:57 UTC #48

I would be ok with this. We could also look into ardeva for verification purposes as well.
I have already setup an account with keybase.io, they are an account verification service for lack of better description. You cryptographically verify that one person is indeed controlling accounts with many different services, reddit, coinbase, etc. They are still in alpha or beta so if anyone wants an invite I should have a few left to pass around.

My profile with them can be found @ http://keybase.io/rdyoung
Keybase doesn't verify identity, it allows verification of usernames, so it would be best used in conjunction with another service and/or sending some verifying info to an admin.

Allen1980s 2015-04-02 16:54:12 UTC #49

I think any of the forum owners work for this because they have trackable histories. There is community respect and then there is professional respect. The two work perfectly together.

AnimoEsto 2015-04-02 17:17:45 UTC #50

I would be happy to stand in and verify, though I am concerned at the amount of "colored coin opportunities" that certain members are starting to generate - it may be something we may want to look at.

Please note - me verifying anything would not be lending approval or endorsing it by GetHashing.

lothendriel 2015-04-02 17:22:18 UTC #51

I think people are just using the nice new shiney tools they've been given really. We've got a nice little micro-economy going here

[EDIT] And most everything here as far as colored coin opportunities have been made public and transparent for the most part.

rdyoung 2015-04-02 17:27:19 UTC #52

Agreed. I can't help but feel like the "certain members" is partially aimed at me.
Yes, I have 2 assets up and running, CSC and ARBX, I threw CMC out there on a whim and a bit half assed, it didn't catch fire and @astro and I decided to run with MNX so I shut it down. So if 2 active and paying assets + 1 that hasn't officially launched yet is an amount worth being concerned over, maybe we shouldn't use GH as a hub for colored coin discussions.

AnimoEsto 2015-04-02 17:28:57 UTC #53

Nope it wasnt aimed at you, if it was aimed at you then you would have heard from me already

Redacted 2015-04-02 17:31:06 UTC #54

Seems like the guy at the head of that list would be Daffy- and Daffy coins I have a Daffy coin Origins, so leave him alone....

AnimoEsto 2015-04-02 17:32:03 UTC #55

LOL actually daffy uses most of his coins to test the sandbox ... which doesnt exist ... honestly

rdyoung 2015-04-02 17:33:11 UTC #56

My humble retraction of that statement then.

Redacted 2015-04-02 17:33:33 UTC #57

Missed a chance to release an Easter Daffy - maybe a 4th of July Daffy coin is in order?

Allen1980s 2015-04-02 17:39:18 UTC #58

Done

astro 2015-04-03 12:43:07 UTC #59

Just to update: There are currently 362 MNX left un-sold.

I know at least a few people are planning to purchase some after payouts from various mining services (including Cloudminr on Sunday) so we are nearing the point where a few larger buy-ins could get us up and running.

I still have around 100 DASH in my personal holdings which can be used to close the gap if we reach that point, and a few other people have also talked about the possibility of increasing their holdings to close the gap.

TL;DR: we're closer, but not there yet

Bishop81 2015-04-03 15:35:27 UTC #60

For what it's worth, I'd rather wait for the Mastnode than have a refund, even if it takes a couple more weeks to get there.

maizenblueminer 2015-04-07 19:12:13 UTC #61

What will supplement and incentivize the masternodes as mining becomes less profitable? As far as I can see, masternodes are only rewarded based on DASH mining, not transaction processing. So as difficulty increases, 7%/yr reduction in block reward, and the presence of more masternodes bites into that shared 20%, what keeps the network running and node operators invested?

astro 2015-04-07 19:53:11 UTC #62

The masternode reward raises as time goes on, so it doesn't stay fixed at 20%. In addition, the entire mining reward is shared between masternode/miner, so the fees are included as well. We didn't include them in the calculations merely because they are unpredictable.