What you propose has had to come a private company to offer it as crowdnode has been. DCG has had years to offer a stacking portfolio and has focused on spending hundreds of thousands of dollars each cycle, to have practically the same as years ago.

I think DCG should disappear from the scene as a representative of this project. The master nodes should stop financing their excesses and focus on financing projects of valid people that demonstrate growth and value for the Dash network.

As for Dash being used by poor people ... don't be delusional. Poor people won't buy 10 Dash if they don't see it used everywhere by the rich.

Why don't people use rubles at the global level, however they do use dollars. Well, because it is the currency of power.

BTC and ETH are the crypto currencies of power, not of poor people. However poor people want to have BTC and ETH not Dash.

Real global advertising, not car rental ads.

All the best

You are a maddened idiot, full of money and luxury!
I see poor people in Russia every day, there are millions of them!
But everyone asks about cryptocurrency and is ready to buy little by little, get acquainted, try and learn.
You cannot find buyers for 1000 coins! FULL FAILURE !!! And no action!
And you don't want to look for buyers for 10 or 100 coins. They seem poor to you and not interesting.
And you absolutely do not understand that there are millions of them, the poor !!!
1,000,000 x 10 = 10,000,000 DASH
We have an expression: The chicken pecks by the grain, but ate the whole bag of grain.

Get many people from all over the world to buy 1 DASH and people will tell each other. They will want to buy 10 more coins, and some even 100.

Change the way people feel.
Constantly cheaper shit in the wallet, the magical feeling of owning valuable gold, of which there are only 18,900,000 and each has not much, but it is steadily becoming more expensive.
People will be happy and will talk to friends and write about it on the Internet.

But unfortunately, so far, people speak the worst words about DASH and dream of getting rid of it.

That is my view too and it hurts to see Dash dying more and more.
I really liked the simplicity of the wallet and hosting a full node is no issue with some HD/SDD space and startup speed etc and transaction are done fast and easy with low fee. What could be better?

Have you ever tryed to host a full ETH node? I did and I learned not to do that ever anymore.
Same but a bit better is BTC. You can still host a full node but you will see that it is unusable for short and sweet payments.

In fact a few years ago I have abandoned both BTC and ETH and have hoped I can do all transaction with DASH in the future.
Turns out that was a mistake.

Had to go back to BTC and ETH because it became obvious that this will gain in values and DASH is on the way down. So I did when I found a solution other than hosting a node by myself.

The only way out for DASH is to make it to be needed for something.

There seems to be no other incentive anymore to have DASH than hopeing for value gain and MN interests. The first is questionable and the later is fine as long as DASH can hold values which is questionable since there are no other incentives to have DASH.

Not a good base for giveing something value.

In order to give it value you have to have a market you can buy things with DASH only. That's a bit my view.

Descending smoothly.

It'll only take 2 years of masternode rewards to get back to an ROI of zero if you invested $USD 24 hours ago

No worries - just measure your ROI in Dash and you'll get 6% always !

Sure. If the ranking plunge isn't going fast enough for you then be my guest.

It's only fair that masternodes should be gifted ever more of the new supply to compensate for their devaluing collateral "network contributions".

That's not selling, it's "brokering". Miners acquire their coin at a cost.

But you never did seem to get that distinction (and neither did many of your co-voters) which is why we're now in this position, having hobbled our most competitive protocol feature of all.

A wise sage once said:

"There is no greater cancer to the marketcap of a digital asset than the asymmetric profitability of its first coin holders"

In the same way that an efficient microchip manufacturer can collapse prices by being more profitable at a lower price, so the masternodes can tank the market by being more profitable than miners at a lower coin price. Then difficulty adjustments make that change permanent and the cycle starts again, leading to a long term ranking collapse such as the one we've seen go on for a couple of years now.

This helps no-one because in the long term, masternodes are simply digging their own grave by devaluing their collateral. It doesn't encourage investment in masternodes either because outside investors look at this and are at least as concerned with capital gain on their collateral as they are with potential rewards. If the reward level is beyond optimal such that it results in a capital loss rather than a gain (when compared against competing, fully mined options) then we will see no net reduction in "circulating supply", even in the limited context of the flawed economic definition currently governing Dash's protocol.

The solution is to target a balanced profitability strategy that sustains a high coin price rather than a high stream of zero-value coins that simply get dumped on markets with no compensating investment in the primary supply (as is required of the pure mining business model).

Go back and have a look at this post. Halfway down it I cite two distinct analytical models (perspectives) on the business model of mining. If you're seeing miners as passing a "cost" onto investors then you've got the wrong one of those two models in your head. You're thinking of things from the perspective of the "widget production model" which is why you'll keep making misplaced valuations and judgement calls about what's good for the asset.

We're not trying to produce coins as cheaply as possibly, avoiding passing "costs" onto the customer as you would do if you were making and selling gearboxes or something. Rather we're trying to store as much value in a coin as possible. If you look at this with a "widget production model" economics head on, it will look like the coins are 'too expensive' and we need to make them 'cheaper'.

That's the defective analysis that informed the "we don't need all this hashrate" insanity. Also, we're not trying to "sell less coins". Since when did low volume become a priority ? If mined coins "hit the market" it's because it was viable to mine. If it was viable to mine it's because there was demand for it in the secondary market. We WANT those coins to be supplied and get into circulation, and it doesn't hurt the price AS LONG as there is a primary market buy side to balance the secondary market sell side.

 • this IS the case with a mined coin
 • it ISN'T the case with a masternode coin

If you want to look at it from a double-entry bookkeeping perspective, then a distinction there is made between A: a cost and B: an investment. The difference, in accounting terms, is that:

A: reduces profits on sales
B: moves value around the balance sheet

So you have to be very sure which model you're dealing with because of you're not utterly clear about it and get it wrong you'll have the OPPOSITE effect to the desired outcome on every performance metric. For example, when a Dash investor at the exchange spends $1000 dollars on Dash, they want to know that the Dash COST their counterparty as near as dammit what they're paying for it. Otherwise their "investment" is simply going towards the profit being made by the trader.

This is what happens with masternode coins. The investor IS having a cost passed onto them but it's the cost of the masternode's profit margin, not the cost of extracting the coin from the chain. It's the latter that collateralises the investor's capital remember. Therefore masternode margins beyond the measurable added value (cost of running a node) do not benefit the investor AT ALL in book-value terms. Whereas with a mined coin, that cost is collateralised by a financially quantifiable increase in scarcity.

============================
P.S. Just remember this in case the message still isn't getting through.

Masternode rewards are NOTHING unless the marketcap increases. They're paid out of coin supply growth, not external revenue, so if the marketcap doesn't increase then all you're doing is slicing up a carrot and telling the holder they've got "more carrots now" just because you sliced it into smaller peices. Note that this is not the case with a mined coin because the miner adds value to the coin by being forced to bid for it. That value DOES come from an external source and that's the role of hashrate - to mediate that value FROM the external source INTO the blockchain.

Alexey45,  nothing will be fixed, because there is nothing to fix, there is no virus in the files downloaded from https://dash.org/downloads/ the reason some virus scanners report torjan or malware in the packages is because they consider mining software to be a trojan, eg in the case of Monero where a website steals cycles from your machine to mine that garbage.  You can safely ignore these messages and go ahead and install the wallet just the same.

Alexey45, I think you better check your sources, only download from the correct location to avoid malware.
https://imgur.com/a/w0zFXFt

Something has changed and virustotal.com shows everything well.
ESET NOD32 Smart Security Premium 15.0.18.0 - does not allow downloading from the official site!
Writes detected virus and removes instantly!
No one can hear me, deaf?
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/releases/download/v0.17.0.3/dashcore-0.17.0.3-win64-setup.exe
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/releases/download/v0.17.0.3/dashcore-0.17.0.3-win32-setup.exe

https://skr.sh/sBPFFSp1Y4c?a
https://skr.sh/sBPOdjYzJZF?a
https://skr.sh/sBP3a8HkR9a?a

You can download it only after turning off the ESET NOD32 Smart Security antivirus.
Then install Dash Core.
Then turn on the antivirus.
And then delete the installation files.

Solve this problem!!!