-
Similar to the new proposal, the original funding scheme, known as the Founders Reward, derived its funds from miners’ rewards where 20% of the rewards would go towards the fund. It was on a four year time limit that ran out.
-
20% of the miners’ rewards go to the fund - of these 35 % goes to the ECC, 25% to the Zcash Foundation and 40% to third-party development. The remaining 80% of the block rewards goes to the miners.
-
Members of the Zcash Community Forum and a 72-member advisory panel. They were included because they know what’s what. I’m assuming the question is refering to the fact that miners weren’t included in the final vote. This was because no miner voted in the first round.
-
They felt that with this financial constraint they would not be able to attract the necessary talent Zcash’s bleeding edge privacy technology.
1. What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
I think the original funding model is made of ECC, and Zcash foundation. Because ECC had taken a lot of control over the project
2. Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
The general community shares 20% of the block reward, which, 35%by ECC, 25% by Zcash foundation, 40% by developer.
3. Who was included in the final vote and why?
72 person community advisory panel. I don’t know why the miner doesn’t want to participate, maybe they have enough reward so that they don’t care about the vote?
4. What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
It will harm the ability to attract the talent
Yea most just don’t care and are purely involved in the project because of profit and speculations. 
-
Funded by the community and some investors, but the were spending more than they took in.
-
The newly approved Zcash Improvement Proposal (ZIP) 1014 will now split block mining rewards 80/20 between miners and a general community fund for coin development in a similar manner to the initial Founder’s Reward. The 20 percent pool will be further split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
-
Votes were cast by members of the Zcash Community Forum along with a 72-person community advisory panel. (The miners did not show interest voting in 1st place, and ECC wants to become ‘independent’ so that blockchain is considered ‘public’ and also kind of approved the decision anyway)
-
Any cap would hamstring the ECC’s ability to attract talent.
-
What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
funded by community but it was spending more of what was received -
Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
split block mining rewards 80 to miners and 2o to community -
Who was included in the final vote and why?
Votes were cast by members of the Zcash Community Forum along with a [72-person community advisory panel] Of the 112 eligible voters, [88 members cast] ballots with the overwhelming majority calling for continued funding. -
What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
because it would not allow to attract talents
- What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
Zcash developer fund, aka Founder’s Reward took 20% of block rewards from miners for founders, initial investors, and some assistance for continued development. It needed to be replaced because the fund was spending more than it took in, and the fund was set to expire in November 2020.
- Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
80/20 between miners and community fund to be split 35% for the ECC, 25% for Zcash Foundation, 40% for third party developers to help “decentralize.”
- Who was included in the final vote and why?
members of the Zcash Community Forum, and a 72 person community advisory panel. Although it seems the ECC had ultimate veto power. No miners were included because of low participation, and no ZEC bag holders because the vote was like a straw pole and also because of the problems associated with manipulation and sybil attacks.
- What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
Because it would limit the profitability of their rent-seeking - ahem - I mean, as a firm on the “bleeding edge” of privacy advancements, it would “hamstring” their ability to attract talent.
-
Zcash’s original funding model was 20% of block rewards were taken from miners and diverted to zcash’s founders and investors along with some assistance for continued development, however the ECC spent more than it took in, also they ran out of funds for development. Zcash is a research-heavy project so they needed a general community fund for development
-
The general community fund is split 35% for the ECC, 25% for the Zcash Foundation and 40% for 3rd-party developers
-
The final vote included the Zcash Community Forum and 72-person advisory panel. Miners were not included due to a lack of participation
-
The ECC rejected an upper-bound dollar limit because it said any cap could hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent
1.) What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
It was funded by the community and their investors, but as reports showed they spent more than they took in.
2.) Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
Block mining rewards are split 80/20 between miners and a general community fund for coin development in a similar manner to the initial Founder’s Reward. The 20 percent pool will be further split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
3.) Who was included in the final vote and why?
Votes were cast by members of the Zcash Community Forum along with a 72-person community advisory panel. Of the 112 eligible voters, 88 members cast ballots with the overwhelming majority calling for continued funding.
4.) What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
Any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent.
1
Known as the Founder’s Reward, 20 percent of block rewards were taken from miners and diverted towards zcash’s founders and investors along with some assistance for continued development.
Community transparency reports showed the ECC spending more than it took in, as well as adjustments to the previous Founder’s Reward meant to increase revenue.
2
The mining rewards will split as follows:
- Miners 80%
- ECC 7%
- Zcash Foundation 5%
- Third-party developers 8%
3
- (40) members of the Zcash Community Forum
- (72) community advisory panel
- (0) Miners as they did not participate in the firs round
88 of 112 eligible voters cast ballots.
4 For fear of not being able to recruit external talent for further development.
- It was funded by the community and other investors, but it was spending too much and it could not support growth at that spending rate.
- It splits block mining rewards so that 80% goes to miners and the remaining 20% is assigned to a community development fund, furtherly divided so that 35% is destined to the Electric Coin Company, 25% to the Zcash Foundation and the remaining 40% to third-party developers.
- It was composed of members of the Zcash Community Forum along with a community advisory panel, for a total number of 112 voters. However, miners were not counted in the vote due to lack of participation.
- Because posing a fiat-denominated funding cap to the possibility of rewarding the organization through block rewards would have impacted on its ability to attract talent and resources.
- 20% went to Zcash founders. Now this 20% goes to the founders, the ECC and third-party developers. This helps decentralization and transparency as well as incentivizing developers.
- 80% to miners, 20 % to community developer fund (which is further divided: 35% for ECC, 25% for Zcash foundation and 40% to third party developers)
- the Zcash Community Forum along with a 72-person community advisory panel
- any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent.
What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
Launched in 2016, zcash’s developer fund was on a four-year leash set to expire in November 2020. Known as the Founder’s Reward, 20 percent of block rewards were taken from miners and diverted towards zcash’s founders and investors along with some assistance for continued development.
Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
The newly approved Zcash Improvement Proposal (ZIP) 1014 will now split block mining rewards 80/20 between miners and a general community fund for coin development in a similar manner to the initial Founder’s Reward. The 20 percent pool will be further split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
Who was included in the final vote and why?
The third group (third-party developers) was included to boost product decentralization, said Amentum Investment Management CEO and zcash community member Steven McKie.
What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
The ZIP placed an upper-bound dollar limit on funding the ECC through the new block reward distribution. For a firm on the bleeding edge of privacy advancements, the company said any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent. As such, the ECC said it would not accept any proposal with similar constraints.
-
What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
The funding model was done through community and investors, but the spending rate was to high that quickly outgrew the fund. -
Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
The Zcash Improvement Proposal (ZIP) 1014 propose 80% to Miners, and 20% to development fund in which split into 3: ECC 35%, 25% Zcash Foundation and 40% third party developers. -
Who was included in the final vote and why?
Zcash Community Forum members, along with a 72 person community advisory panel. -
What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
It would limit the ability to attract new skilled talent.
1.The value of the coin depreciated and their funding was from the same product “the coin itself” Simply put, the coin wasn’t performing enough to pay for the development.
- Per the article: The 20 percent pool will be further split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
3.ZEC bag Holders were added into the voting process -
- “any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent”
1. What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
Because zCash’s developer fund was on a four-year leash set to expire in November 2020.
2. Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
80/20 split between miners and general community. Within the 20% reward for the general community there will be a further split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
3. Who was included in the final vote and why?
ZEC bag holders as some thought they deserved representation.
4. What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
the company said any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent. As such, the ECC said it would not accept any proposal with similar constraints.
-
20% of the block rewards were taken from miners to fund it, and it had to be replaced because the ECC was spending more than it took in.
-
80% of the mining rewards will go to the miners, and 20% will go to a general community fund split into 3 groups, 35% to the ECC, 25% to the Zcash foundation and 40% to third party developers.
-
40 members from the Zcash community forum and a 72 person community advisory panel were included in the vote. 88 of the 112 eligible voters voted.
-
The ECC’s reason for rejecting a cap was that any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent.
- What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
Known as the Founder’s Reward, 20 percent of block rewards were taken from miners and diverted towards zcash’s founders and investors along with some assistance for continued development. Total amount of this rewards was restricted to 10 percent of the total ZEC supply.
It needed to be replaced because during bear market the Electric Coin Company (ECC) and the Zcash Foundation had problems to attract and hire talented developers in order to continue developing Zcash.
- Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
Under the newly approved funding model, the general community pool (20% of block mining rewards) will be split into three groups: 35 percent for the ECC, 25 percent for the Zcash Foundation and 40 percent for third-party developers.
- Who was included in the final vote and why?
Final vote included Zcash Foundation and ECC members and did not include miners – since no miners participated in the first round. A vote by ZEC bag holders was held but it was not taken under consideration by the Zcash Foundation because blockchain voting has yet to solve the challenges associated with manipulation or sybil attacks.
- What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding?
The company said any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent.
-
Zcash developer fund was for four years and it was need to be replaced because it was expired at November 2020
-
Fund allocation:
80% => Miners
20% => Community => 35% ECC, 25% Zcash foundation, 40% Third party developers. -
Zcash Community Forum with a 72 person community advisory panel.
-
Organizations ability to attract talent.
- Community and investors. Expenditure was higher than income.
- Mining rewards are split in the ratio 80/20 between miners and community. 20% split into three groups: 35% ECC, 25% Zcash Foundation and 40% third-party developers.
- Community Forum members and 72 people form the community advisory panel
4.Any cap would hamstring the organization’s ability to attract talent.
- What was Zcash’s original funding model, and why did it need to be replaced?
20 percent of block rewards were taken from miners and diverted towards zcash’s founders and investors along with some assistance for continued development/ time ran out
- Under the new funding model, how is the general community fund allocated?
The Zcash Improvement Proposal (ZIP) 1014 splits block mining rewards 80/20, between miners /general community fund, for coin development in a similar manner to the initial Founder’s Reward. The general community fund, 20% is split into three groups: 35 % to ECC, 25% to Zcash Foundation and 40% avail to 3rd party developers.
- Who was included in the final vote and why?
the Zcash foundationECC along with a 72 person advisory panel. Both accepted the proposal.
- What was ECC’s reason for rejecting an ‘upper-bound dollar limit’ on their block reward funding? To continue to be appealing so as to bring in Developmental talent