Masternode Proposal (rejected)

[email protected]

A Problem statement

Masternodes is a compelling way to attract more interest. It rewards those who take part with a certain amount of coins. This can be operated on a separate blockchain keeping intact BtcZ original chain. This will help preserve the coin and its ethos. Masternodes is decentralised as those participating will be on a global scale.

Mission Statement or Vision

Objectives to be achieved.
Some of the special functions that these nodes perform are:
• Increasing privacy of transactions
• Doing instant transactions
• Participating in governance and voting
• Enable budgeting and treasury system in cryptos
This provides an alternative reward-based method to be involved with BitcoinZ other than mining. This opens a wider scope for your target audience(The World).

Preferred approach:

Just like full nodes in a cryptocurrency, masternodes can be run by anyone. However, there is an entry barrier in place to ensure that the system doesn’t get malicious. The entry barrier is what one needs to commit or collateralize certain units of that particular cryptocurrency to run a masternode.
This is done to ensure that a masternode owner doesn’t cheat or corrupt the system and the best of doing so is by putting this entry barrier where the masternode operator has something at stake in the whole game.
So naturally, it becomes very less likely that a masternode operator will cheat because he has a stake in running the whole system and even if he chooses to do so he will be punished in the form of devaluation of their own HODLings.
Now that you have understood the concept of masternode, let us see what all things are required to set it up:
• One needs a minimum amount of coins. E.g (you need 100 000 BTCZ units for a MN) So this minimum number of collateral required which enables you run a MN.
• One needs a VPS or server to host that wallet for 24 x 7
• One needs a dedicated IP address for that
• One needs some storage space to save the blockchain

These are the pretty much same requirements for any masternode cryptocurrency.
Cold or local wallet In a cold wallet, the administrator sets up the wallet for coin storage on a computer on a private, protected Local Area Network (LAN) with a non-routable IP address. This is usually the administrator’s desktop or home computer. The administrator will transfer the required coins to the address to be used for the masternode, and use the local wallet to start the remote masternode coin service on the host exposed to the Internet with a routable IP address and port. Once the service is started, the administrator can close the cold (local) wallet. The server on the Internet will handle all the necessary communications between different systems forming the coin’s full network.
Guidance: Guidance and tutorials to be provided to allow the community to participate.

Benefits statement
Masternodes are very useful for crypto investors because of running a masternode you are incentivized. Consider it just like earning a monthly or weekly interest on your crypto holdings.
Different cryptocurrencies have different incentive models through which an MN operator can earn a decently monthly or weekly income. I call it smart passive income.
Benefits of achieving objective result in exponential growth of BitcoinZ

Performance and progress measures
• Masternodes
• Valuation
• Volumes
• Price Increase
• Buy support


Possible Avenues:
BTCZ Chain
100 000 BTCZ Collateral
Offline Wallet to Hold Coins (Windows Wallet Only)
VPS to run specialist BTCZ Code

A Separate Chain
New Coins distributed with a decreased number of total supply (To Be Discussed)
A ratio of 1:100 Coins to holders (100 BTCZ = 1 BTCZ XX)
Offline Wallet to hold coins (Windows Wallet Only)
VPS to run specialist BTCZ Code
Both the above are just a eg scenario and not a official proposition as I believe this part is best understood by the developers.

Costing & Funding

  1. Donation from community to enable developers to work on the code as this will take up resource

What is a Masternode:
Masternode is simply a cryptocurrency full node or computer wallet that keeps the full copy of the blockchain in real-time, just like your have Bitcoin full nodes and is always up & running.
But masternodes are considerably different in their functionality than normal nodes.
They are different because they perform several other functions apart from just keeping the full blockchain and relaying blocks/transactions as a full node does in Bitcoin/Litcoin.
Some of the special functions that these nodes perform are highlighted above:
These masternodes are not standalone but they are always communicating with other such nodes to make a decentralized network and are often referred in short form as MN.
Note: Mostly the masternodes perform the tasks that I have listed above but it can slightly vary from cryptocurrency to cryptocurrency depending upon how masternodes have been implemented. But more or less they perform these functions in a cryptocurrency.

Not Necessarily Proof-of-Stake (PoS):
Many cryptocurrency users who don’t know better assume that masternodes are an extension of Proof-of-Stake (PoS) coins (i.e. cryptos that aren’t mined, but are staked), but that’s not true. There are Proof-of-Work (PoW) projects that make use of masternodes, so these kinds of nodes aren’t exclusive to PoS or PoW.
With that being said, running a masternode is PoS-like, in the sense that you generate passive income through a masternode just by holding your coins, similar to how stakers earn in PoS systems.
So it’s something to consider: you can make passive income with a masternode just like you could through a PoS cryptocurrency, but you don’t need PoS cryptos specifically to run masternodes.

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters


Moved to Proposals category

1 Like

Masternodes are a great way for the rich to get richer. This completely goes against the spirit of BitcoinZ. IMHO, masternodes are an artificial means of increasing pricing by making people HODL, making less coins available for trading.

I prefer BitcoinZ grow naturally. I prefer BitcoinZ to become adopted and used by everyone. I prefer BitcoinZ to be a coin for the people, by the people… Not one for the rich to buy tons of and HODL just to passively make even more!

Masternodes are a gimmick IMHO. While it may give BitcoinZ a boost in the short term, I don’t think it’ll provide it with any benefit for the long term – it may actually end up hurting it.


This is against the principles and also considered to change the way consensus works, but not necessarily change it, which is also against the criteria of community acceptance in the community paper.

It also enables the rich to control ownership of the nodes system, as usually the entry to own an MN is very high.

Most importantly, a MN gets closer being inside the boundaries of the definition of a corporation - because of the ‘stake’ (like a shareholder) in the project, with promised return of “income” (the MN rewards) - which in the United States the SEC is using under the Howey test to label coins/tokens a ‘security’. This will create legal issues.

1 Like

This is a great idea and only shows the development of the coin with the current times. It is not necessarily to serve as a way of generating substantial sums of money for those that setup as MN, but protects the longevity of the project and btcz blockchain. Classic current examples are DASH and PIVX - well established and demonstrate the benefits and positive aspects of operating masternodes in the correct manner. All in all a great idea which I feel should be implemented to demonstrate further growth and strentghens the position of the already excellent btcz project.


I agree with this idea as it will develop the coin further i currently have a Zen and PIVX masternode and it doesn’t make you substantial amounts of money like the first 2 comments suggested. It’s also decentralised as the nodes are scattered across the globe. This help secure the btcz bloclchain.


Reading deeper into this, proposals are not to generate ideas to hand off to the ‘developers’. You must own your idea - that means develop it and maintain it. Proposals are not a mechanism of ‘forcing’ the current members of the development team to implement anything.

Second, the main chain was launched to always be PoW - if a blockchain developer can build MN’s on a side chain - that is the only way it can be implemented without disrupting the founding principles. Understanding the way masternodes work, however, it seems like this still does not align with not changing the block reward, as it seems the block reward would not go 100% to miners (minus pool fees of course) - which would effectively mean changing of a founding principle.

Third, the way BitcoinZ was launched - compared to almost all other projects - it was launched, in my opinion, in the most purest form with Satoshi’s vision. If it was not, and we begin moving down the path of MN’s and voting rights - we move to closer to the definition of a security under the United States SEC. Although I understand the US is not all countries, the purpose of BitcoinZ is to have global presence and it can only have a chance at this by not falling under the purview of strict and aggressive regulation from ANY country.

For the reasons stated above, this should not be implemented.


In all honesty, no matter how the vote goes, this can’t be implemented on the original BitcoinZ blockchain due to misalignment with the founding principles. If someone really wants to have masternodes, they’re more than welcome to fork the coin and create them there.


I agree with @cryptorex posts above. Proposal system was misunderstood. Proposals cannot force developers, since they are volunteers, to do a work that they do not want to do it. They spend their own time building stuff that they believe will change the course of BTCZ and will bring it further to the main goal: global adoption.

My second thought is that voters don’t know what they are voting. The withepaper says it clearly: always PoW, never changing consensus. Masternodes are PoS, and I don’t agree with giving rich people more power. BTCZ is about fairness.

This being said, main chain should remain the same and will remain the same. If someone wants to fork into a new coin or build a side-chain that’s another thing, but BTCZ main chain should remain the same.

And voters … Please read the white paper and learn more about crypto before voting such change on a fair coin.


I see. So for this sort of thing to be accepted and implemented a team of devs will need to be formed.

Masternodes can work along side POW it doesn’t change to a non minerble coin.

A seperate chain is best which i gatherd hence i offered that scenario above.

1 Like

Proposal maker didnt want bad, He just saw how popular MN coins, but
Most of the miners dont actually know what is this…
Its for centralization, that means, MN holders gonna be rich, its unfair
against the others!! Leads to corruption!

Why do we even vote about something that is against the basic principles of BTCZ ??

1 Like

There is alot of negativity around masternodes from what i gather here which i find really odd. You say btcz is for the community yet on the masternode function treating it like a common “shitcoin” as it’s being compared to the coins that so call make you rich which infact it doesn’t.

I voted YES as i was comparing it to coins like Dash, Pivx and Zencash.

BitcoinZ needs to enhance it’s features to attract investors. The only people currently investing in the coin are those mining or been part the discord and telegram groups as such.

I do alot of promotion work be it attend events or word of mouth and honestly speaking i struggle to attract attention to BtcZ as it’s not taken seriously. Whereas when i talk about Zcash, Zencash, Oyster Prl, IOTA or Cardano it gets instant attraction.

BitcoinZ was established 6 months ago and i can see this project failing badly if it isn’t enhanced. Take a look at projects like Zcash and Zencash these are figureheads you need to be targetting.

If Bitcoin was made now do you believe it will achieve top 100 cmc status??

If Masternodes is implemented I shall gladly help if i can provide assistance.

As a general rule I don’t have a problem with Masternodes. For some coins they are the right thing but I’m voting no here because:

a) Masternodes are against the founding ethos and principles of BTCZ
b) The proposed 100k BTCZ MN fee is way too low

1 Like

The colletral was just a example. The main objectives was to propose a Masternode the technicalities was just a scenario which can be anything.

@Seahawk instead of 100k BtcZ it could be 500k BtcZ for eg

I reopen the topic and restart the vote.
We shell discuss MN features in case of a security shield against a future’s 51% attack!
Well are we really vulnerable?

Without a focus on protection from 51% attacks, I am not a fan of this proposal as written. I think it’s best to keep this one locked, rewrite, and revote.


you are right, in this form the proposal is not supporting our menthality. I close the vote again.
Manster Node by a shield against 51% attack should be rewritten as a proposal under a new topic.
Thank you.


On the light side. The topic itself is under a 51% attack :).

51 % No
49 % Yes