SUB1X Extent of Issuance Reduction - Proposal

[SuB1X-Coin]

Requested funds

N/A

Describe your proposal

A vote was initiated on the previous superblock cycle on whether or not the overall block reward should be reduced. We had a 19% node participation rate, with the overwhelming majority (125 Yes - 13 No) voting in favour of lower rewards.

Now we must determine the extent of reduction. The governance system only allows for binary "Yes" or "No" choices, making it impossible to vote for multiple reward structures on a single proposal.

This issue is focused on deliberation around the following: the amount of proposed reward structures that should be put forward for voting, suggested issuance reduction categories and the vote counting system that should be implemented.

I propose a simplistic +1 for a "Yes" vote and -1 for a "No" vote, with each MN holder able to vote once on each proposal. The proposed BR structure that scores highest by the end of the next superblock phase would be implemented in our next wallet update.

Mention your Discord username
willdono

[thewatchers1456]

I like this idea. It is far better in my eyes then dragging out the process through multiple superblock cycles to narrow down the communities pick for the new block reward.

[SuB1X-Coin]

@thewatchers1456 Got any suggestions on the choices we could setup for voting?

I am thinking 5 categories:
0.03 total block reward
0.02 BR
0.01 BR
0.007BR
and 0.005BR

The same 80% MN / 20% POS ratio would be maintained for each reward structure.

[thewatchers1456]

I would suggest doing
0.035
0.030
0.025
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005

It's a lot of proposals to write up but I think it would get the best range for the community to pick from. Not only that Omni Analytics is in the process of analyzing MN governance, and I think it would be a good mark on the project to run as many choices as possible.

From a personal perspective I wouldn't mind returning to the original BR but not any lower. As always just my opinion.

[jbmustaq]

with just 19% mn participation you are looking to propose something which 81% did not voted. Don't you think this is a big disparity of people who are not willing to vote for something which they don't feel like voting.

and just a small number of votes you are willing to decide the future of coin also you are not providing the details as to how it will benefit the network by lowering the rewards or if this has other benefits.

Please don't do like other networks who change everything on there whiffs.

### There should be a limitation of Masternode holders who should participate to make a proposal legal.

[thewatchers1456]

It is very unfortunate that so few choose to vote but the 81% have their reason for abstaining. Some choose to have no opinion. Some are unable to vote because they are using a MN service that does not allow them to vote. While other have forgotten about their MN and the project all together but forgot to disable the MN.

If the scenarios above are correct I think it would be unfair for the project and the community as a whole to deny development.

The proposal below explains in detail the reasoning for a BR reduction, and has an extensive community conversation in regards to it.
#8
These conversations also took place over in the Discord chat server as well.

From a personal perspective I agree with the inflation reduction. I was not pleased back in February 2018 when the BR was increased by 5x without a MN governance vote. At least this time the community was allowed to make the decision.