My take is that we worked against each other rather than supporting those that hold the knowledge and we really want to have around. Instead of support, we built a narrative how bad they are and that they’re ruining the project. This turned into endless arguments that were constant unproductive energy leeching. It was rather predictable this would happen as it happens in every other community as well - Grin is no different when it comes to mental cost. I think it’s much better now, but I’m not sure if the same thing would repeat or not if new people came or if theoretically, they returned.
That’s not where the difference between fiat and cryptocurrencies lies. Cryptocurrencies introduce a cryptographically safe asset whose printing is predictable and can’t be changed. Grin is perhaps the most predictable one because its emission model is the least arbitrary. The printing of USD is not predictable as 2019 has shown us.
That’s not true. Money is far more traceable than ZCash z2z transactions - assuming they’re used. While cash is less traceable than Grin, I think Grin has better properties. It doesn’t require me to meet in real world to transfer the value to the receiver. Confidential transactions also have this nice property that at no point in time, does the receiver know the amount of the sender. That’s not true for cash because when you pay in the store, the store creates your “change output” by returning you the remainder they owe you.
The model Grin went for was a more fair launch than the alternatives I’ve seen and this includes the emission model. Nothing prevents a single person buying every single coin in any model - it’s an open market.
You could say the same for Bitcoin in early days - probably even for less money.
I’d personally welcome new projects to the space that introduce something new and better than Grin. Just like a lot of Bitcoiners welcomed Grin.
Breaking the monetary policy is perhaps the worst thing we can do to this project. We’ve gone through the most painful starting years which were expected. The inflation is not going to be as low as in other projects for many years, but the longer we wait, the less this move makes sense.
Suggesting a monetary policy change because we suspect someone is buying coins is a very reactive hard fork and these don’t sound like a good idea to me. It also makes the person you argued is buying millions of Grin hold a higher % of supply in 5 years than with today’s monetary policy where the inflation would lower the % of their holdings. I also suspect this likely achieves the opposite effect of what you expect it to - the person accumulating would become an even more aggressive buyer if we changed to 1 coin per minute because they already think Grin is a good deal today. It would be an even better deal with your proposed change.
I think this is not the way to go about solving things. The way we dig ourselves out is not by having reactive/panic hard forks, but by becoming a more active community. Start contributing blog posts, images, paintings, talk to your friends about it, contribute by having more tech discussions, suggest/pick-up a bounty if you can and help the community understand and spread the word.
A reminder about the monetary policy from yours truly Emission rate of Grin - #88 by igno.peverell