Yes it can, and I use it for my money. You cannot decide what I use for me for my count unit. You use whatever you want, without my permission too. Thank you for accepting freedom.
You are also confusing the cryptoparty assembly, with digital democracy.
these are separate thing.
Ah! Another jump.
You do not answer, as always when you face the wall.
And the banana wall !
1 Like
Maybe you want me to repeat:
A) a man is not free in uCoin, because it is not democratical
B) if we want this man to be free, uCoin has to be democracy
C) we form a democracy with this man, because we are free to do it
D) we are free to do such thing, so we must be under a democracy yet
E) so we donât need this democracy
So sad 
No problem.
If you want to be the king, decide all initial values about uCoin, and have everybody as your servants, it is your choice.
It is our choice to serve you, or not. This is the usual model. People are get used to kings like you. They dont like them, unless they are very good indeed.
Digital Democracy is something new, something rare also. Just for curiosity, I think it will attract people. Look for example your own curiosity, due to this curiosity how big this very thread became!
So you really donât understand? This is not about my decision here, it is just about logic.
If we are free to create a democracy, it means we are already in a democracy. So I canât be a king.
I mean, all this is your words ⌠you do to not even agree with yourself. 
I agree with myself. Of course we are in a democracy, although in our local democracy the majority are irrationals.
Universe as a whole is a democracy, governed by souls. And around earth there is a local democracy governed by a majority of irrational souls (the deamons). Deamons decided irrational local laws (the same laws that the scientists are calling âeternal laws of physicsâ which in reality are not universal laws but only local laws around earth) and they turned earth from democracy into a dictatorship. But democracy always resides behind this dictatorship, because democracy is the real nature of universe, as described in the tree of life (which is a decision tree), a tree created by God. We have to âbelieveâ and âprayâ with all the force of our souls, which means we have to stand our vote in favor of democracy in front of the tree of life. And oneday we will become many and overcome the local majority of the local deamons. That day the laws of physics will change. But this is another thread.
In this thread lets talk about digital Democracy (and how it can be applied in uCoin project), not about metaphysics.
So lets go back to earth now.
And lets talk about PROTOCOL PARAMETERS of ucoin.
Is there anyone who Knows how the values are measured?
How they are initialized? Are they integers? Are they real numbers? Are they percentages?
What are they? Do they belong to a closed set? How big , or how small can they become?
It is very crucial we examine those parameters, in order to be able to vote about them and not let a king decide.
Read http://en.trm.creationmonetaire.info/ and you will know how these initials values are calculated.
I am not looking to documents. I am looking to the code. Documents are many, the code is one. I am looking to the practice, not to the theory.
Who decides the %growth of the Universal Divident?
Can he decide a 0% growth, or a 1000000% growth?
What is the opinion of the servants, when someone has the absolute power to decide this very crucial value?
Are they stupid enough to join uCoin and at the same time let the king decide or even change this initial value at his own will?
You may say, we are going to create 100000 ucoin communities, and let people freely join the community that has the initial value they prefer. Ok, but what if this value varies in time? do people need to change communities then?
Why create those 1000000 ucoin community whith different initialiazation of %growth of UD? Isnt it much more easy to vote about this initial value?
These numbers are decided thanks to the demonstration made into the RTM about the 4 economical freedom and its conclusion which is the symmetrical issuance of money in space and time.
Now, if you donât want to read it, if you want to continue to circle jerk, I canât do anything for you. We already gave you all the keys, you are free to try to get it or not.
Dont point into your theory. Lets talk about the impementation.
How %growth of UD is decided into the code, into the protocol?
This is what I am asking you.
I believe that into the code, %growh is put hardcoded. Am I wrong?
No they are not. They are decided by the initials members of the community, when creating the first block of the blockchain.
Aha!!! So the inital members of the community decide the %growth of UD for all the future generations!!!
Do you think this is democratic?
There is absolutely no problem with that because the money is issued symmetrically in space and time.
Read the RTM, or you wonât understand anything about what we are doing here.
I ll read it, but I AM SURE that your theory will not answer.
Because if you had an answer, you will tell me immediatly, and you will not point to the theory.
You point to the theory because you want to obscure things, you dont want to clarify.
Ok, I am back
Saying it
with other words c growth of the monetary supply M is relatively stable
and distributed symmetrically between whole presents and coming
actors. These solutions with Universal Dividend ensure the respect of
the relativity principle. the density of the money is ensured in all
time and space, avoiding that way the extreme monetary droughts (sources
of deflation), as well as the extremes of the excess of monetization
(sources of local bubbles or hyperinflation).
The money is created in a continuous way consistent with the
continuous replacement of the generations and the growth of the
chosen monetary supply, c is equitably attributed in space=the whole individuals
at a âtâ instant whatever âtâ is, which is the only way
not to harm the economical actors from present as well as future ones,
that we can also name âflow of individualsâ.
So it is well the space-time factor, and more exactly the temporal
dimension (generational), linked to the limited duration of the life of
individuals, that changes the nature of the definition of the money. So
we need to avoid the fundamental error that is to considerate the whole
actors as a âpermanentâ quantity. Understanding that it is a flow of
individuals in perpetual renewing, and that in that flow there is no
reason to privilege any of them regarding the monetary creation in the
whole economical space-time thus determined.
You chose a c growth, this is clear.
the growth of the chosen monetary supply, âcâ is equitably attributed in space
And this growth may be symmetrical in space and time, but it still cannot change after initialized.
Democracy is a matter of taste. I prefer 20% c, why am I wrong?
C growth is a constant, isnt it?
It is distributed accross space and time symmetricaly, but isnt it possible we intialize a community with 10% c growth, and another community with 20% c growth?
You define 10% because it fits to the lifespan, but what if the lifespan varies among time?
Lifespan is not only our death, it is also whenever someone becomes inactive and leaves ucoin community.
So in case you define 10% of c based on lifespan (80 years), and it statistically happens people to leave community (aka die) after 4 years, then 10% is a wrong initially decided value.
Conclusion:
Regarding EV initial value
ev is a statistical measure. It should not be decided hardcoded to 80 years, but to whenever people statistically leave community. Community must VOTE the inactivity time, the time after which someone is considerd âdeadâ.
In that way we will force somehow people to become active in the community. This inactivity vote is a kind of glue. As long as people know that there is an inactivity time, they will become more active. Another reason is because death can be defined only in physical terms, but in digital life death is undefined. In digital life we cannot separate death from inactivity.
We should be allowed to cast a vote for ev in between 1 year and 80 years. And the result should be the average. And of course all future generations should also be allowed to vote for ev, and ev value should be able to change in the runtime.
Regarding C initial value:
Fortunately, c is also a closed value.
ln(ev)/ev < c < ln(ev/2)/(ev/2)
So we can VOTE c also, whithin those closed limits.
For example I vote c=ln(ev)/ev, you vote c=ln(ev/2)/(ev/2) and the result is the average.
And of course all future generations should be allowed to vote for c, and c should change in the runtime.
Regarding Democracy:
This is democracy. Democracy is a practice, it is a customization. This is how c initial value can be democratically customized.
It is assumed of course that the 4 principles of uCoin are already voted in the plebiscites. Because the decision about the c value appears as a result of the acceptance of those 4 principles. So those principles have to be accepted-voted before we decide what to do with c.
This is how plebiscites are dependant eachother. The c value plebiscite depends on the result of the plebiscites of the 4 principles of free money. If we like the 4 principles of free money, then we can vote about c. If we dont want the 4 principles of free money, then the plebiscite that decides the value of c may exist, but it is hidden into the decision tree. So that people do not bother about it and focus on the alive branches of the tree.
You could calcul growth with 40 or 120 years life span.
Do this growth is very different than growth with 80 years life span?