Grin Raised €55,000 Development Fund, but People are Still Questioning its Monetary Policy
Grin’s pseudonymous founder Ignotus Peverell has posted an announcement titled Early Disappointments on Grin Forum yesterday, saying that he was “disappointed by the way the industry around Grin is shaping up”.
The revolutionary anonymous MimbleWimble based cryptocurrency has gained much attention from the crypto community since launched. However, the work team of Grin still encountered difficulties in raising fund for salary for their full-time developer Yeastplume (Michael Corner).
The Yeastplume campaign is to raise funds to allow Corner to work full-time in Grin, but it was still “very far from being even 10% funded” at the time of publication of Peverell’s post. As thus, he was disappointed with industry.
He said that it was a lesson for every development team that:
“more scammy ICOs for more money and a lot less work and perhaps forcefully taking 20% of all rewards is the only way to get any contribution out of the mining industry.”
Peverell called on more new funds, miners, mining pools and exchanges that have entered Grin ecosystem and benefited from it to support their development through donation. He emphasized that great developers like Yeastplume are very important, they contributed a lot to the project, which enables investors to gain more profit Grin.
Fortunately, a lot of community members participated in the donation after seeing Peverell’s post. Finally, the €55,000 donation target goal has been met which enables Grin to pay Yeastplume’s salary from March 2018 to August 2019.
Some source disclosed that Qtum CEO Patrick Dai donated 10 BTC under an assumed name of “keepwalking1234”. In addition, F2Pool also donated 1 BTC to support the funding campaign.
However, although the development fund issue has been settled, for the time being, the money shortage may still take place in the future without any fund-raising activities. Investors are still questing the sustainability of Grin’s monetary policy and it’s unlimited supply which is not good for speculation, but Peverell has his own considerations.
In a post published in February 2018, he explained that :
- At a minimum consider the loss rate when building supply curve. Ever wondered at which point 50% of those 21M bitcoins will have disappeared, for example?
- Compare with other slow emission coins. After 8 years, grin only has 33% more supply than bitcoin or, to pick something more recent, zcash. Argue why this matters (or not).
- Compare with fast emissions coins. Monero had over half emitted in 17 months. How does that affect long term adoption? How about use?
- Rich lists and coin decentralization. What affects them.
- Analyze average crypto user and investor behavior. How does multi-year emission curves, fast or slow, influence them? What are the real adoption drivers, both long and short term?
- Do not use econ101 in your arguments. That can be used to argue anything and its opposite equally well. And before telling us we don’t understand economics, convince Nouriel. Then maybe I’ll listen.
- Consider different strategies and how they can play the strengths or weaknesses of various blockchains. What is the effect on Ethereum when daily supply is hard forked for example?
- Facts and real research. Unsubstantiated opinions are a nanogrin a dozen.