As “Lottery Block”-voting passed (haven’t told that to you yet), while doing the change to reflect the addition of a monthly Lottery Block, why not vote about other Telos Fundamentals too to see if some more changes should be done at the same time, especially when considering that the latest halving came by surprise and hence no voting about fundamentals were done.

Dashboard therefore now has two votings:

One about POS/MN split, and another about The Master Node collaterals.

Masternode Collateral options are following:

1. 1K / 10K / 30K / 1M / 3M
2. 1K and 100K
3. only 1K
4. only 100K
5. only 300K

Right now the option 5 is winning with 767 votes, and the only other option that seems to be having votes is option number 4. However, due to how the dashboard displays those votes, it is difficult to say how many votes number 4 has, maybe 50, so well behind option number 5.

This Masternode Collateral voting however might not have any relevance in the end, since the other voting is about the split between POS and MN.

POS/MN split options are following:

1. 50/50
2. 30 POS / 70 MN
3. 10 POS / 90 MN
4. 90 POS / 10 MN
5. 100 POS

Option number 5 means there will not be any Masternodes anymore, but only Proof of Stake, which by other words mean wallet staking, and right now it looks like Option number 5 is winning by slide, for option number 5 currently has a whopping 120 105 votes for it and due to how dashboard displays votes, I can’t really see if any of the other options have any votes or just some compared to this option.

What do these changes mean in practice?

well, Masternode collaterals give a different kinds of options. Like currently as we have had 100k – 10M nodes, it means that entry to master nodes is a bit expensive compared to 1K nodes, and such high options like 10M seem to have also contributed to having perhaps even too few nodes since the network has had problems every now and then.

Few nodes however is not automatically a problem.

having only for example 100K nodes, would increase the number of nodes, and keep things simple, since each node is always just that 100K, and also theoretically increase network stability, however, in practice it also tends to mean that people who want to run 10M worth of nodes (that’s hundred 100K nodes) might look at cheapest possible options, which in practice results in bad nodes, and bad nodes result into a bad network.

When it comes to POS / MN split, this naturally affects the appeal of running nodes. Less for MN, less appealing it is to run one, which naturally affects the number of nodes.

However, especially since now the 100 POS option is most voted, which I personally hope will win, I will point some pros and cons about that.

One bad thing is that currently Blueboxes are at least theoretically running a Telos master node. With 100 POS, they might not be doing so anymore. So those rewards might be gone for the bluebox owners, although there isn’t really any reason why blueboxes couldn’t change into running 24/7 wallets instead to support the network, except as far as I have understood, blueboxes are not running master nodes currently, but owners have anyway been paid the amount of Telos they would have received if 100K masternodes had been run on them.

Another bad thing is that Telos will lose some visibility, for example places like masternodestats.info list master nodes and their profits, but if Telos moves to fully POS, will masternodestats.info update its system to also show full POS Telos, or simply remove it from the list?
While masternodestats.info, I hope, will update POS Telos to its list, many other places might not.

To me, good things however outweigh those bad things like possibly losing my Bluebox Telos income.

For one thing is that POS is very simple. You just keep your wallet open and Telos inside it and you can get more. This is very beginner-friendly compared to running master nodes where just setting up one takes a lot of know-how, and on top of that if you don’t know what you are doing you might end up messing the whole Network, like happened with Telos 1 when we had over 10 000 Master Nodes in the network and many of them were run by noobs or people who didn’t care but just tried to squeeze every penny out of it with the cost of network stability.

This beginner friendliness might well attract some new people into Telosland since you buy some amount of coins and they start getting more very easy.

Another problem solved is that Teloscoins codebase is based upon PivX, and as far as I have understood, there seem to be lots of bugs in PivX code that haven’t really been fixed by most of the PivX based coins. And to my understanding many of these bugs have to do specifically with Master Nodes.

One exploit bug was actually tried to be fixed in Teloscoin once, but since not enough master node owners started running the new fork, the new fork couldn’t get off, and hence the fix never happened.

Which also gives one more reason to go to full POS. Who says we have enough master node owners who care to update to the next fix fork either?

Of course this doesn’t mean that wallet users will do any better, but at least it is easier to just update your wallet and start it, than setting up an updated master node. So my guess is getting new forks with changes in effect will be easier with full POS, and we already know that at least master node owners failed us once.

If you are not happy with how voting is going on currently, or if you wish to make sure it goes as it now looks like, now is the time to go to your Dashboard to vote on the options.

You have time to vote until 5 pm (UTC) on the 29th of October, which is roughly one week from now, and each vote costs 1 Telos, and you can cast as many votes as you like to the options you like.

edit 25.10.2021:

According to the username halalsolutions message on bitcointalk thread “old Transcendence ANN”, it seems my understanding of Blueboxes mostly not running Telos master nodes anymore was confirmed.

However, it would also seem that my understanding of the basis of today’s bluebox payments is wrong.

As said in the article, I thought the basis on payments was on “virtual” Telos master nodes, but appears, according to halalsolutions message, that the basis has been in some sort of storage renting system, probably something similar, if not the same, to what Project Alexandria is supposed to have in Blueboxes.

When in the article I said that full POS could remove bluebox income, halalsolutions seems to think it could rather triple the bluebox income since according to him, bluebox rental income is based upon the collateral represented by blueboxes, and full POS would mean more income since blueboxes represent most of the collateral. I don’t know if halalsolutions is right, but my guess is that halalsolutions is better aware of the system than I am.