The next step would probably be putting it up for a vote, but I think it needs more discussion before we do that. Early in the thread before we got sidetracked with the opt-out PoS discussion there was a lot of hesitance to this PoW tax idea. I was also hesitant, but I’m leaning more toward supporting it now as long as there are no huge security ramifications.
Why did I change my mind? I care greatly about retaining as much decentralization as possible in our network and as some have pointed out this change would impact that level of decentralization to a certain degree. PoS security would remain at the same level, but this would give the foundation board members a lot of financial power to effect change. We have seen how the Bitcoin Foundation was corrupted, so it’s clear why there is hesitation to go this route.
At the same time I believe in our current team/board members. We all have similar values and because of that I have to trust that they won’t suddenly be corrupted and become evil. I have to trust that that they will continue to care about moving us forward in such a way that retains Peercoin’s core values. Stakers will always have the option of removing this tax in the future if it doesn’t end well, but I don’t think that will be necessary. This is one of the most principled crypto communities there are and I think that will translate to the Foundation leadership as well.
The fact is we are up against unspeakable odds right now. Things have greatly changed over the past couple years. Our competition is incredibly well funded and they are outcompeting us to the point that every time I make a new announcement in r/cryptocurrency it’s obvious that people have never even heard of us. This is a travesty given Peercoin’s history. What’s more, everything costs money now. You have to pay for exchange integration and support in important apps. It is rare now that Peercoin is integrated somewhere for free. Ledger was the rare exception and it took us a whole year just to get that. I agree with ppcman that our meager voluntary donations are just no match to compete with this.
Peercoin is one of the most important innovations ever created and it cannot be allowed to go out with a whimper. We are here to provide a sustainable, distributed and censorship resistant blockchain network where all forms of value can be stored long-term. We are the best at this, yet people don’t realize it. It can provide an important service to the world, but not until we are recognized for it.
I don’t want to see our incredible volunteers suffer from burnout. If it’s a choice between allowing in some amount centralization and watching Peercoin die a slow death over time then I will choose to risk centralization. If Peercoin dies then it can’t help anyone. This tax at least gives us a fighting chance to come out of this and prove that a Foundation can stick to its values and work toward the benefit of the network. It is a risk yes, but it is much better than the alternative. I am willing to take that risk and I believe we will be just fine.
If allowed the chance, we could act as a shining example of what an open source crypto project should be like for all to see, but instead we continue to suffer needlessly without the necessary financial resources required to make an impact in this industry. I’m tired of our project not getting the recognition it deserves for its accomplishments. We invented proof of stake. We invented efficient and sustainable blockchain technology. We invented the first true distributed autonomous organization (DAO). We invented the first blockchain agnostic token protocol. And yet we receive no credit for these achievements because we have little financial resources to prop ourselves up. I think it’s time for a change. We need to do something different. We need to take a risk and I believe this may be it.
It is true that PoW is used as a mechanism to distribute new coins to new holders, but I don’t see how this tax changes that. Mining requires work to get that block reward and then it is sold on exchanges to new owners in order to pay for mining operation costs.
If this change took place these funds would be distributed to people who do a different form of work for the foundation. Those people have the choice to keep the new coins or also sell them on exchanges just like miners do. Since they are being paid for services rendered by the foundation then it is likely they will just sell and convert the PPC to fiat in order to pay their own bills, so the result ends up being the same, more PPC available for purchase on the market, just through a different path.
I think it’s also of note to say that mining is a voluntary act. If stakers change the rules of the network then certain miners don’t have to accept it if they don’t want to and can move on and leave more rewards for others as the PoW inflation rate dynamically adjusts to the change.