This RFC proposes to discontinue Proof-of-Work, allowing Peercoin to become an efficient pure Proof-of-Stake coin.
4 Likes
Peercoin was launched with Proof-of-Work serving as the primary mechanism for achieving a fair initial distribution of coins. That objective has largely been fulfilled. Continuing to issue new coins through Proof-of-Work may no longer broaden ownership in a meaningful way.
My experience with Peermining illustrates this point. Although it is a relatively small mining pool, many of the miners I recruited sold most of their mined Peercoin immediately to recover electricity, hardware, and operating costs. As a result, mining did little to create long-term stakeholders.
Today, Peercoin is distributed across more than 200,000 addresses. While address count is not a perfect measure of ownership, it clearly shows that the network has moved well beyond its initial distribution phase. The original rationale for maintaining Proof-of-Work as a distribution mechanism is therefore less compelling than it was at launch.
If preserving Peercoin’s identity as a hybrid Proof-of-Work/Proof-of-Stake blockchain remains a priority for the community, one possible compromise would be to periodically reduce Proof-of-Work rewards through scheduled halvings. However, this would introduce additional complexity without materially improving network security.
The question isn’t whether the hybrid approach was essential to Peercoin’s success—it clearly was. The question is what consensus model best positions Peercoin for long-term success from this point forward.
Matt’s proposal deserves careful consideration and thoughtful discussion. Whether the community ultimately supports or rejects it, I believe the conversation should be guided by Peercoin’s current economic realities, security assumptions, and future goals rather than by its historical design alone.
4 Likes
Hello, hello, crypto fam!
I’ve been on the fence of this proposal for a long time now. I am too poor to participate in industrial mining but I’ve been interested in the machinery since learning about Bitcoin long ago. These days I only have two LuckyMiner’s (a LVL7 and LVL8) and have been using the new pool that @wingyu created to earn a meager stream of peercoin. By contrast, I mint A LOT. So on a very personal note I am super in favor of finally letting go of the proof of work distribution and focusing on using fewer real world resources to support our dear currency.
Also, @MatthewLM has demonstrated themselves to be intelligent and considerate. I think they have earned political capital and should be allowed to help us get better. We’re very lucky in this regard.
2 Likes
PoW allowed for the fair distribution of Peercoin but it is not used to secure
the blockchain. Ongoing PoW, dilutes existing holders with a cost that is no
longer necessary. It has a downward effect on the price with negative
environmental impact.Moving to pure PoS makes Peercoin easier to understand with a clear narrative
of efficiency.
That dilution cost is about 1.1% p.a and trending down. One percent per year is a small cost to pay for all the benefits of continued PoW distribution (better liquidity, greater participation in coin generation, insurance off-ramp for Bitcoin miners to avoid sending ASICS to landfill etc). Frankly, I don’t buy this theory that it has a downward effect on the price. I mean, it may do at the margins, but if negligible inflation had such a strong downwards effect on the price, how do you explain the high prices of shitcoins with double digit inflation?
Pure PoS = pure piece of shit. The reasons to deprecate mining simply aren’t strong enough and remains a cynical attempt to dry up exchange liquidity to pump bags. The arguments to remove PoW have not become any clearer or more convincing since the previous thread about this and the proposal is a solution looking for a problem. Also, the explicit mention of narrative suggests some here are more concerned about optics and marketing rather than real world utility. If we want peercoin to appreciate in price, this community needs to get real and start building tools that people will want to actually use.
I have always viewed Peercoin’s PoW component as a temporary thing that would eventually be discontinued once stakeholders come to believe it has finished serving its intended purpose of thoroughly decentralizing coins into as many hands as possible. Only because of this temporary status have I felt comfortable pushing the green message of Peercoin for all these years. It might take some time for minters to agree on discontinuing PoW, but I believed our message of efficiency would eventually become true.
So, my agreement with this proposal has less to do with drying up selling pressure from miners on exchanges, and more to do with aligning Peercoin itself with the green message we have been selling people on for the past 14 years. I agree that it would make Peercoin much easier to understand. We would no longer be selling a green message to the public while simultaneously holding onto energy wasting block creation. Over the years, this has allowed other PoS networks to claim that Peercoin is not truly efficient and tout their level of purity over us. Accepting this proposal would make these arguments obsolete.
But this is not just about improving optics to me, but about Peercoin becoming what it was always supposed to be, a decentralized financial network that relies ONLY on time as its security mechanism of choice as a way to avoid the costly waste of real-world resources. I want Peercoin to have as little footprint on the environment as possible, while maintaining a high level of security. This is our main argument, and the message should not be muddled by continuing to hold onto PoW.
2 Likes
Agree with Sentinelrv above and also support stopping the PoW era for Peercoin. The value of continuing PoW with the dilution it causes versus the optics and marketing options we have, provides me with an obvious choice that is time to end the PoW era.
Nonetheless we also need to get real and start building the tools as pennycap tells us so the coin can also be actually used over just a store of value. It is both.
It is great to see that work is again being done on Roast under the Sygnature name in another thread in this forum. Peercoin has a bright future! 
1 Like