Before I start, a little bit about my perspective.
Goals of Radix:
- Radix has superior technology compared to all other projects and focuses on buildability. This makes Radix clearly the No. 1 choice for dapps once the main net is launched.
- Radix also wants to add another layer/feature to the internet, where trustless value transfer can take place
- Radix wants to deliver a global trustless medium of exchange
- Radix wants to have public and private networks (similar to a LAN/WAN approach in case of networking)
To summarize the above, radix tech is pretty amazing.
Level of confidence by the team and active community members about the tech:
- Team: The team seems pretty focused on delivering a perfect product, from which I get that they really want to have a product which is as good as possible. The never-ending delays of the launch support this. When speaking about their product they seem very confident that they can deliver it and that it will be a success.
- Genesis Community: Are even more confident than the team from the view of an outsider.
- Non-Genesis Community: I think the reason that they follow Radix and contribute their time speaks for itself
To summarize the above, everyone seems pretty confident about the radix tech.
Sounds good, what’s the problem?
(1) How can a new medium of exchange be distributed in a fair way? (2) What is fair? (3) How to reward the early investors (Genesis Community)? (4) How to reward the team and the founder of Radix?
Those are good questions are purely opinion-based. I will try to explain my thoughts and hope for civilized feedback.
(2) What is fair? Nothing. Get over it, please, there is just fairer and less fair.
(1) Well there are two cases, first one is if Radix is “just another” crypto project, finds it’s place on the top 10 on https://coinmarketcap.com/ has a few dapp’s running on it and then stagnates due to some issues (currently others fail to solve the trilemma, most people talk about scalability when touching this topic). In this case, I am 100% fine with the current ECO Paper. It is reasonable to give everyone who is on the list (radix DLT, genesis, foundation,…) a huge stake. Genesis Members funded it, Dan and Radix Staff built it, Foundation will manage it in the future, Stable Reserve is self-explanatory, the public is able to buy some of the tokens, fine!
In a very abstract way, Radix just developed a cool new thing that is useful. Think of it as a company (just for one sec please), basically, a service is offered (the DLT), the investors and the team own it. They profit from the ICO/IPO/SCO(as in second coin offering)/whatever you want to call it. Then, in addition, the public can earn via their service (running a node) AND even have a say in what the foundation should do (governance paper still missing so I can’t go into details here). I mean that’s awesome, compare it to amazon, google or facebook. You’ll see that the current model is much “fairer” than those. (Fairer in “” because of course, the founders played by the system and had success, now they are rich and they earned is just as anyone else could)
Now here is my BUT, which I bet everyone was waiting for.
The Radix ledger (don’t confuse it with Radix DLT) is not a company. When Bitcoin launched it was about multiple things. First of course, the tech. Adding a layer/feature to the internet which allows the transfer of virtual things (opposed to copying; the double spend problem) in a secure and trustless manner. Awesome. But it was about something else, the economics about it. Satoshi decided to distribute them to 100% by rewarding the miners. This was the first approach of “how shall I distribute my new currency” in a fair manner. As anyone can see this hasn’t worked out at all.
After BTC there came a few good projects and a ton of shitcoins, and from my view every single one of them failed when it comes to economics and distribution. As Radix aims to do better than all previous DLT projects, I ask, why not do better at economics too?
Several ideas I picked up or thought about (excluding those approaches that are “company like”, and for the record, I am not saying that those aren’t “fair” enough, just asking how could you do better?)
Majority of tokens are distributed via …
- … like Bitcoin, give everything to the ones that keep the network alive (nodes in the case of Radix). This one get’s a big NO from me because that’s just giving all tokens to whales, I know node running is easy with Radix, but most people won’t be able to run 100000 of them.
- … selling the tokens to the public pre mainnet launch, also a big NO from me because extending the GC (200 people) to maybe about 10000 people from the rest of the community, doesn’t really solve the problem of whales. (Hint: if someone suggests that, he is greedy and won’t accept that he missed the chance to invest in 2013, he is in for the money and not for the tech or fairer global economics)
- … gifted to governments, NGO’s ,big companies and individuals if certain criteria are met. For example a gov can claim their XRD in case they allow their citizens to pay their taxes in XRD, or if they use a voting dapp which runs on Radix. Amazon could be gifted with some XRD if they accept XRD as a form of payment. In case you have already got a partnership with any gov, you could conduct a airdrop to all citizens.
- … tokens are given to the foundation and the foundation sells 5% of the tokens, every year. People have to sign up, do KYC and then register to buy tokens. After that everyone can buy an equal amount of tokens, where as the amount depends on the persons which signed up to buy tokens. Even if you bought the years before.
What about OTC markets? Shit happens, get over it. OTC can’t be avoided but that doesn’t mean you can use it as an excuse to put no effort at distribution.
(3), (4) Of course the question remains, how to reward the team and early investors? The idea of capping them because “you already made x ROI” is a little bit offensive (took this one from telegram). They deserve a huge reward for their investment, whether time or money was invested, without them Radix wouldn’t even exist. On the other hand it shouldn’t lead to the biggest whales which have ever existed in history. For comparison: Jeff Bezos, the riches person on the planet has about 0.00234% (*) of the money available and I would consider him a whale. So what alternative models are available to reward them, other than allocating 25% of all tokens available to 100 people? At the moment I can only think of one good alternative. 1. An amount of tokens on mainnet launch and 2. Fees, 50% to nodes, X% to foundation/burned and (50-X)% to GC and Radix DLT/or people from Radix DLT
I tried my best to express my thoughts on how the distribution of XRD could be made fairer. I think GC & Radix DLT should get a big reward, but I also want to avoid whales. This is the reason why I think they should dramatically decrease their share at mainnet launch and then receive a % of the fees forever, it scales as the network grows. How the rest of the tokens are distributed at launch is still a good question and I hope someone has better ideas as I have.
Do I think this is reasonable? Hell yes! Dan always stated that he isn’t in for the money and I took him seriously. Some Genesis members that are active in the community seemed to have the same goals. I have to admit the current ECO paper draft doesn’t support this but well, it’s worth a try.
(*) 110B$/4687000B$ = 0.000023469, Currency in circulation - Wikipedia of course these numbers are a bit off, as I can only base this on publicly available information.