Bible Pay

Read 350 times

  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 227


    • 26
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 am
    more
Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« on: August 04, 2019, 11:47:41 am »
With the new GSC system that came as an exciting novelty in Biblepay Evolution codebase, the block reward breakdown was substantially changed to

GSC 40%
PoBH 20%
Masternodes 20%

(remaining 20% consists of Charity/IT/PR monthly superblock)
 
I believe that this breakdown strongly discourages MN owners and gives incentive to dismantle MNs and bet for the bigger ROI of GSC.

While we all will benefit from the inflow of new users that GSC brings, at this moment GSC is reported to be 10-12 times more profitable than MNs.

Also, Masternodes operation has associated costs and burdens, and in the near future MNs will have a key role in maintaining the network integrity with LLMQ.

Because of this I would like to propose a more balanced reward breakdown of:

GSC 30%
PoBH 20%
Masternodes 30%


This still leaves GSC room to grow, without eroding too much the original promise of 40% reward for MN owners.

PoBH remains untouched as I believe it's critical for the integrity and the added value of Biblepay chain.



  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2030


    • 27
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2019, 08:11:07 pm »
With the new GSC system that came as an exciting novelty in Biblepay Evolution codebase, the block reward breakdown was substantially changed to

GSC 40%
PoBH 20%
Masternodes 20%

(remaining 20% consists of Charity/IT/PR monthly superblock)
 
I believe that this breakdown strongly discourages MN owners and gives incentive to dismantle MNs and bet for the bigger ROI of GSC.

While we all will benefit from the inflow of new users that GSC brings, at this moment GSC is reported to be 10-12 times more profitable than MNs.

Also, Masternodes operation has associated costs and burdens, and in the near future MNs will have a key role in maintaining the network integrity with LLMQ.

Because of this I would like to propose a more balanced reward breakdown of:

GSC 30%
PoBH 20%
Masternodes 30%


This still leaves GSC room to grow, without eroding too much the original promise of 40% reward for MN owners.

PoBH remains untouched as I believe it's critical for the integrity and the added value of Biblepay chain.

1)
According to our current reward schedule we actually give 20% to charity, 30% to GSC, and then we split the remaining 50% among POBH/Sanc (So Sanc should be receiving 25% right now, and POBH/Heat mining 25% right now).

https://wiki.biblepay.org/Economics

2) Although I agree that security is of the utmost importance, let us remember that since this change would require a mandatory, the very earliest it would be implemented is with or after ChainLocks goes into prod.  ChainLocks technically means we will be immune to 51% attacks (and forks), because each block will be monitored by the Sanc Quorum, giving us more freedom to implement "cool" things without compromising security.

In light of that, I think we might possibly be able to take 5% percent from POBH (simply because it's mostly wasted heat) with the requirement that ChainLocks be in place first.

And take the remaining 5% from the GSC.  This would change it to:

20% - Charity and Governance
25% - GSC
35% - Sanctuary budget
20% - POBH/Security

Do you agree with this, if so could you please edit the OP post for further clarity on what they would be voting on?

If not, please let us know that we should tweak again.

Thanks, this sounds pretty good overall, as what you said about "original plan" resonates with me.  Although I will add that we did vote in GSC's for the extensibilty and flexibility of biblepays future.

Also, we should post this link on bitcointalk and publicize this once its ready.

« Last Edit: August 08, 2019, 08:15:24 pm by Rob Andrews »


  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 227


    • 26
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 am
    more
Re: Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2019, 04:14:53 am »
For some reason I cannot edit posts (not even OP)

But yes, I do agree with your proposed reward distribution
20% - Charity and Governance
25% - GSC
35% - Sanctuary budget
20% - POBH/Security

I also agree that, if approved, it must be deployed whenever is best for the coin's interest, not immediately.


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2030


    • 27
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2019, 07:04:27 pm »
For some reason I cannot edit posts (not even OP)

But yes, I do agree with your proposed reward distribution
20% - Charity and Governance
25% - GSC
35% - Sanctuary budget
20% - POBH/Security

I also agree that, if approved, it must be deployed whenever is best for the coin's interest, not immediately.

Ok, sounds good.



  • jaapgvk
  • Hero Member

    • 617


    • 31
    • September 01, 2017, 08:02:57 pm
    • Netherlands
    more
Re: Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2019, 12:14:29 pm »
I want the GSC payments to be large enough to incentive people to go that route. Of course, as a Sanctuary-owner, I would be nice to have some direct rewards, but I think it's also important for our survival to grow long-term. GSC seems to be a very pleasant way to grow, since it's helping others in the process, and - in my view - has the potential to onboard a lot of new people. I don't really know enough of the variables involved to make a good decision at this point in time, to I'm leaning to abstain my vote for now...


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2030


    • 27
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: Aug 2019 - Block reward breakdown adjustment
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2019, 12:38:19 pm »
I want the GSC payments to be large enough to incentive people to go that route. Of course, as a Sanctuary-owner, I would be nice to have some direct rewards, but I think it's also important for our survival to grow long-term. GSC seems to be a very pleasant way to grow, since it's helping others in the process, and - in my view - has the potential to onboard a lot of new people. I don't really know enough of the variables involved to make a good decision at this point in time, to I'm leaning to abstain my vote for now...

I agree with you Jaap that GSC is our nicest method for new user rewards (other than heat mining).

The net effect of MIPs proposal has changed GSC from 30% to 25% of our daily rewards, so it was not a huge blow to it.  You can always post a counter argument here for MIP to tweak his final assessment before we vote (although we vote soon!).

One thing Sun has brought up recently is how disgruntled small fish are competing with the whales in the POG campaign.  So I think if you agree with this proposal % change as is, probably the biggest impact you can make is help design an idea that would limit how much whales can take from POG, and allow more to flow to the small fish.  But it has to be done in a secure way, where it cannot be hacked by outsiders who try to game the system.  Right now only true coin-age that is not invested in sancs that has a tithe attached can earn a reward.  So its a big improvement over many many schemes, but still the whales get the biggest rewards.  Finding a way to reward newbies would potentially increase onboarding, but we are all at a loss as to how to improve that.