where the idea comes from that 1 or 2 Grin devs will be paid a couple thousands Grin and Grin liquidity will deepen?) Thats absurd man.
Point is , its a symbol and dedication to Grin project .
And legal ,tax issiues are for devs problems , it is funny if a devs paid with Grin and commit to crime, we will be responsible?
Grin liquidity wont be crash with a couple of thousand usd ,if its your concern then you accept Grin is in death spiral.
You lately mentinoining many times about this law,tax and privacy issues. i dont get it. Grin is neutral as Bitcoin. if it is your country ,why Grin or Bitcoin care your laws?
Yes and no.
For example, in the Netherlands you cannot (prohibited by law) to deposit Grin, you can only buy and sell at the exchange but not withdraw or deposit.
That is a real issue that we should take into consideration, we do not want to force a problem on devs.
At the same time, if it is a small %, it should not be a problem much to Devs, they can see it as investment and commitment like you said, but they will not need it for their daily living.
And indeed if you never start an economy, it will not appear out of thing air, changes should be coached gently by implementing incremental changes such as these (paying partly in Grin), followed by natural growth. Extremes should be avoided, like not using Grin at all, or paying 100% in Grin.
ā¦As I said earlier, both points are really valid and should be taken into account. Multiple truths can exist at the same time.
if a devs cant deal %20 Grin better not fit in the project and i am not meaning full force a very talented guy dictate. But defending Grin %0 seems odd to me.
it shows 0 confidence to your currency. Only hit and run devs ,take the money and go. With an unfinished ,half done things.
That is the idea ,we want long time dedicated Grin people and grow the community. you cant force people to love Grin ,but Grin community should have a little backbone.
I think we are missing the point hereā¦ the topic isnāt about discussing Grinās inflation or liquidity. Since when it is our problem to solve Grinās liquidity issue? I donāt get it. It is extremely hard to have a conversation when people seems to be more focused on being the smart one rather than solving anything.
First, we donāt want to create a problem for contributors. Second, 10% seems to be a good amount to start.
And yes, good luck selling a product you donāt think is worth buying .
Letās put things in the other extreme to show the weirdness of the situation. Letās demand exactly 1 Grin. Everyone that contributes is paid 1 Grin.
With this in demand, weād basically say this:
The contractor should potentially go through the paperwork and research the regulations on Grin in their country - possibly even pay consultancy for it and perhaps be required to fill some additional monthly paperwork because of it. To get a payment of 1 Grin.
Itās easy to see this makes no sense because the value of 1 Grin clearly isnāt worth putting contractors in such a position. But at which point is it? The lower the value, the worse it is. The higher the value, the more we force an asset they might want to sell for whatever reason - and all other possible issues I mentioned above.
I can see why it would be cool and would support it myself, but I donāt understand why it would be a requirement. Anyway, thatās just my view on these things. I got involved in this thread more than I really wanted and donāt want to steer the opinion of others - just wanted to make sure people take these things into account.
There is a simple solution for all the hypothetical cases mentioned here: to talk. I think Grin should be as neutral as Bitcoin (as @Cobragrin said). At the end, if a potential contributor has an issue with receiving x% of grins, they just need to talk and thatās all, done, problem solved.
I think we are sending a wrong message by not inviting people to hold (not hodl) grins. We already have Slatepacks.com to exchange grins for products/services, we probably want to support those kind of initiatives more.
I think it worth trying to give it a try, I donāt believe that someone will say: āI wonāt contribute to Grin because they suggest to accept 10% of the donations in grin, I know I can decline the offer, but still I donāt want to decline, I will just not contributeā.
If we get at some point with no liquidity at all we already doomed anyways, but again, we can just suspend the policy at that moment.
These 2 sentences contradict themselves since if we donāt want to create problems for contributors we must not require them to get grin. What you probably want to say is that we should create problems but small enough that it wouldnāt push them away.
Liquidity is important, if Iām a dev and i get 10k grin and have no exchange where i can sell it then i would view that as a bad experience. Why am i getting 10k grin at price 1$ for 10k$ work if i canāt get 10k$ by selling it because of low liquidity?
Not worth buying doesnāt mean itās worthless. How would you sell grin today? If you canāt hold it without losing vast amount then it would need to have some uber liquidity for it to be used today, from my eyes it has neither today, hold automatically becomes no problem over time and itās easier to get liquidity after that. I think youāre all too impatient
Anonymous can you close that voting mechanism to comments. We already discussed and voting period.
After all i dont get it that usual vegy and phyro creating this drama? Why you are explaining your voting and trying to influence others @oryhp . You have 1 vote as everybody.
Just vote .
I cannot close it. It is fine, some discussion is healthy. For now we heard diverse opinions and we can agree to disagree, that is perfectly normal
I do want to keep it open for other members to give their input, or explain their voice. For now I think @oryhp and @Cobragrin have fully explained their views, so you both can stay on the side line in this discussion.
We discussed and phased to voting period . Why those drama again?
This is totally OK, @oryhp (and everybody) has the freedom of expressing his mind. There is no need to silence anyone. It is fine to disagree.
Who said it is not a problem?
It seems totally ridiculous to me that a cryptocurrency project does not support its own currency or its ecosystem.
Grin is dead shitcoin and no one on earth going to accept it as an asset if developers and even community does not have an agreement that it is valuable tell me why should I in my business accept grin or if I want to attract people using it give them discount if grin community and developers does not accept it?
And believe me or not the only way to save grin is daily use having. extra more exchange will probably help, but it is unusable if you canāt buy a service with that. usability will create demand and volume for both miner who wants to sell and people who want to buy, to pay something with grin and this will help grin price and rank there is no other way around this is what grin wanted to be.
My vote is 10%, and they can decide to increase it in any way they should not have any problem selling for example 4000 dollar worth grin we have the trade ogre that reach 90k volume sometime and maximum few days you can sell it, and we have gate soon we have kucoin as well.
Iām not against allowing them 10% of their payment to be in grin, i donāt mind even 100%. Iām against forcing them to accept grin today. Anyway Iāll just vote, i believe you understand my point and itās not a problem if we disagree
Hi there,
Very new on the forum, so please do not shoot . The idea makes sense I feel, at principle level. But, as I am new, I have no idea: in which situation of shortage of good developers the project is? are there armies of talented people waiting for the job? or simply a good team of regular strong developers? Not enough people to make progress as expected? No candidates for days/weeks?
My 2 āgottsā on the topic is that, pragmatically, it should be the targeted timeline and the needed pace against the developers availability that should drive the way it is financed and the related flexibility.
I vote for 10% minimum in Grin. Contributor can ask for 100% if he likes to, but 10% should be minimum. Also I donāt think it would be a practical issue. It seems somewhat unlikely to me that someone would want to contribute to Grin but at the same time would have a problem with getting at least 10% of the payment in the same Currency he contributed to.
Thereās no point to pay in grin in current situation. 2 shitty exchanges, low liquidity.
Grin is still in an early distribution phase(40%? inflation rate). If you will pay in grin it will be dumped on exchange on the same day.
Pay in grin if only a developer want it, making it obligatory stuff will just scare away some developers and others will just need to do extra annoying steps to use 2 shitty exchanges to dump the coins.
I think at least 10% is a good balance. Compared to past payments it should be less than $ 1K so liquidity will not be the problem.
The advantage is that payment with GRIN will force the devs to go through the same user experience as the users they develop for them, outside of testnet.
itās just 10% or 20% , not 100%
Is this thread going to make any change, is there anyone is CC or OC that wants to do this or not?
Yes, the CC is very serious about this . We wanted to discuss all the pros and cons before putting up a proposal to vote on in one of the coming Community Council meetings.
We expected nothing less than a healthy discussion like we had here, so we can put forward a proposal that is well founded and takes into consideration all the concerns from the different voices in the community. I think we have more or less enough material to make this proposal and put it to a vote soon.