I’ve thought about off and on the fact that there were exactly 10% of the 2^32 of coins issued for crowdsale allocation. And actually fact documents that extra coins were generated accidentally.
I take into consideration, the notion that these coins could possibly throw off distribution of the coins that are generated by the future. And in order to rely on this variable not playing a role in future optimizations, etc, then clearly those maidsafecoins that were generated above 429m should not enter and become safe coin, my opinion.
Additionally, it could set the record straight, coin market cap could adjust the figure to the correct amount of 429m and that would reduce the amount of coins to the prescribed correction. That could be good for the public perception, and for history;
I think that this is something to consider as beneficial to the project and community and therefore, important to discuss and conclude especially before safecoin. Mentioning this, my memory fades on this though I remember reading/hearing before that those accidental coins had not been distributed to general public;
I don’t think so, because think of the first farming. Spending those coins on Safe Network will dilute and occupy the future. Because if they are spent meaningfully for data, then they will buy space earlier than anticipated and consume that space.
So unless they’re used up as safecoin before the first farmer, or (the maidsafecoins) not used at all is the only way that I see that they’d just recycle. But if they are spent meaningfully I think it has an impact.
It shouldn’t be hard to address. I believe MaidSafe was given those over-printed MaidSafeCoins by Mastercoin after the crowdsale; they were wrongly produced and never paid for. MaidSafe holds them and they can be easily deducted from the 5% the Foundation generates on day-0.
But I do very strongly agree with @dallyshalla. It is of crucial importance to project SAFE and to the credibility of the cryptocurrency eco-system in general that we are transparant and correct in handling with this error. I would be in favour of burning those coins, but proving they are safely held would be good too.
I think that we can just only see what the safecoin data looks like, which probably has a hardcoded limitation to number of coins made.
I sincerely doubt we can check how many safecoins are circulating on the live safe network at any time;
BUt we can see how many maidsafecoins there are and where they went, if they are burned for safecoin we can see, and if they are burned for nothing we also can see that.
I don’t think you’ll be able to see what was burned for Safecoin.
Well, you can see what was burned, but ultimately you have to trust that MaidSafe did or did not issue more or less or differently than that.
A MAID holder can send his coins to 1BlackHoleadfasfasfadsfasfasdf and broadcast his SAFE wallet address from the bitcoin address from which he sent MAID coins to the burn address. But that’s as far as your visibility goes.
From there on, it’s all trust.
You can get a positive proof (e.g. SAFE address 12345 got 100 SAFE in exchange for 100 MAID the owner burned), but you can’t get a negative proof (e.g. no SAFE address whose owner did not burn MAID got SAFE).
I feel like we can even add a limitation, and say: this SD brings in maidsafecoins from xyz address in the amount of ‘a’ and then we can track balances and deposits and if it’s right, it won’t allow past a certain amount, and also spent maidsafecoins could just be put to in neverland which would make the process more simple to track balances of pretty much just only the neverland address. and prevent any future generation of safecoins through maidsafecoin beyond the maximum limit of 429m. where converted coins don’t mix back in with the rest of the unclaimed maidsafecoins.
What concerns me is that if you do not honor all the maidsafecoin then those of us who purchased maidsafecoin afterwards (say at poloniex) might see some/all of our purchased maidsafecoin disallowed.
Also after reading this thread I am still unsure of the problem that the around 30 million (is it 30?) extra maidsafecoin will cause since all of them were paid for?
I seemed to have missed some important issue around this.
I’d add that also, it is apparent that even those extra coins are under MaidSafe’s control so I think it’s easy to maintain that 10% were indeed just only used from the crowdsale and no greater, by not spending out the over generated amount in the crowdsale;
The network is under good control of MaidSafe and is fully determined in a stable launch, and that means it can’t get botched by unknown interferences or individuals.
and I think in the case of the foundation, it will generate 5% and so in not using extra coins it wouldn’t be a loss, and selling maidsafecoins seems like it would not get a fair price on the maidsafecoin exchanges.
I wouldnt disagree with you there in technically yes, though unintended for.
This is the important question, the one I think @dallyshalla is getting at. Your concern is only valid if the excess MaidSafecoins are introduced and traded for BTC.
Only MaidSafe can cryptographically proving with a signed message where they are. And it is an issue because they weren’t paid for - hence “excess” MaidSafeCoins. It was a printing error during the crowdsale publicly acknowledged by Mastercoin (their printing press) and MaidSafe.
- hence “excess” MaidSafeCoins. It was a printing error during the crowdsale publicly acknowledged by Mastercoin (their printing press) and MaidSafe.
