After just over 2 weeks of grin being live, I’m disappointed by the way the industry around Grin is shaping up. Of course it’s early, but I’d rather not this be an indication of future direction.
Grin was started with as fair of a launch as possible for what’s under our control. We did this for good reason: we believe in Grin’s mission. I think I made pretty clear that to continue forward, the project would still need help. And yet yeastplume’s campaign is still very far from being even 10% funded.
The lesson for every development or research team watching looks pretty clear: more scammy ICOs for more money and a lot less work. Perhaps forcefully taking 20% of all rewards is the only way to get any contribution out of the mining industry. Are those the conclusions you want to impress on everyone in this sector? Because if greed feeding on itself is the only lesson, then this space truly deserves a really long and hard winter. A lot more creation is needed to reach escape velocity, and that won’t happen if everyone’s goal is just feeding off it.
To be clear, this isn’t addressed to the existing community that has been extremely generous and admirable at supporting us over the last 2 years, when things were a lot more uncertain. This is directly addressed to some of the new funds, miners, mining pools and exchanges that have entered this ecosystem since the launch and benefited from it.
So please, forward this to those you think this message concerns. Perhaps a Chinese translation would be a good thing. Make everyone aware of our needs. We have a long way to go, this can certainly be fixed. And keep in mind that Grin will profit infinitely more from the contributions of a great developer like Yeastplume than from any single additional miner, exchange or fund.
This is a difficult fight against the rational behavior of letting others foot the bill for community-funded development.
Logically, it would behoove the largest coin holders and miners of Grin to support the project. If Yeastplume funding fails, it could significantly damage the value of the investment.
I would also direct this to all the cheaters (which we had quite a number of at Grincon U.S.): investors buying developers tickets, thieves stealing other people’s badges to give to their friends, and people sneaking into the conference without paying…all knowing full well that the conference proceeds would go to the dev fund. It’s really shameful. It takes advantage of the many people who have donated their time and effort, as well as money in supporting the development of Grin.
Perhaps every time someone asks for support on Gitter (or other channel) - be it a miner asking how to do something, an exchange asking for Grin integration help, a fund asking for info in order to make an investment - should be made to contribute after being helped. Quid pro quo.
How does the cuckoo license play in. Does the wording mean all closed source miners need to share fees? @tromp
—-
FAIR MINING
Any derived miner that charges a developer fee for mining a fair coin
—one with no premine or other form of developer compensation—
shall offer to share half the fee revenue with the coin developers.
Grin can only succeed when it attracts more developers and participants. Also the intentions of the team behind grin are not clear as of yet. In this uncertainty, people will not fund a newcomer project.
Did you expect anything else? If anything I been thinking this launch has been rather smooth, the lack of proof of payment tools means otc is a place of fraud, that I haven’t found a way to bandaid. But this all went better then expected, beem launching first on a symbiotic day is definitely a move that could have lead the market astray; yet I don’t see that having an effect.
I am willing to chat with you about this. I am not qualified, but I know enough. What is it that you are confused by? Let’s talk about these things because we need to know.
I agree that Grin is not easy to understand. If you are just looking at it as an investment. Let’s talk about it. Where are the areas of confusion for you?
I can understand your perspective. But from the outside it looks so much differend. Not saying thats your fault. Ask yourself: why there is only two pools beside the one you cooperated with? From my point of view, a couple of strategical mistakes have been made. PM for details.