Topic: [ANN] [ASIC-RESISTANT] UltraCoin (UTC) - Ultrafast 6 second transactions!! - page 34. (Read 946599 times)
July 06, 2014, 05:04:25 AM
I agree with above posts. Going full POS isn't the solution to our problems or it is a step taken too fast. We need to take things slow, step by step. The first thing is to increase demand not to decrease coin supply artificially. Demand should be increased by future projects such as game plugins and acceptance by shops, which we already done.
July 06, 2014, 02:56:47 AM
I've said this in the past and I'll say it again. What this coin needs is the one thing it's never really had: CONSISTENCY.
We had a bumpy launch, we had serious issues with our first exchanges, learning to configure hardware for the various N-values became a nightmare, we changed block reward, Devs left, new Devs showed up... We changed POS from 1 year to 1 week, and before we even reached the block where we switch over we announce we're going to full POS?! I mean, seriously, the LAST change hasn't even gone into effect yet!
Even aside from the consistency issues, I'm also very troubled by the "manipulation" as some have labeled it. And I have to agree. You can rationalize it any way you want by using words like "unsustainable" but the bottom line is, you're intentionally changing (manipulating) the supply of coins available to the market in order to increase the price. I feel like we're all buying into a common misconception: Limiting supply is the same as increasing demand. THIS IS NOT TRUE. They are two completely different things with unique causes and effects. The price may go up in the short term as a result of limiting supply, but without the "organic" growth that comes from liquidity and ACTUAL demand, the price will only sink further in the long term.
This community is doing a lot of things, and some of it includes trying to increase that demand rather than just limit supply. But judging by this forum, our discussions, and the headlines we're broadcasting to the crytpo-world, this community is more concerned with limiting supply than increasing demand. And this is a BIG turnoff and red flag for investors.
We had a bumpy launch, we had serious issues with our first exchanges, learning to configure hardware for the various N-values became a nightmare, we changed block reward, Devs left, new Devs showed up... We changed POS from 1 year to 1 week, and before we even reached the block where we switch over we announce we're going to full POS?! I mean, seriously, the LAST change hasn't even gone into effect yet!
Even aside from the consistency issues, I'm also very troubled by the "manipulation" as some have labeled it. And I have to agree. You can rationalize it any way you want by using words like "unsustainable" but the bottom line is, you're intentionally changing (manipulating) the supply of coins available to the market in order to increase the price. I feel like we're all buying into a common misconception: Limiting supply is the same as increasing demand. THIS IS NOT TRUE. They are two completely different things with unique causes and effects. The price may go up in the short term as a result of limiting supply, but without the "organic" growth that comes from liquidity and ACTUAL demand, the price will only sink further in the long term.
This community is doing a lot of things, and some of it includes trying to increase that demand rather than just limit supply. But judging by this forum, our discussions, and the headlines we're broadcasting to the crytpo-world, this community is more concerned with limiting supply than increasing demand. And this is a BIG turnoff and red flag for investors.
July 06, 2014, 01:52:37 AM
Miners dumping coins on exchanges was never your problem. That's the only thing this full PoS solution really solves.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
+1
July 05, 2014, 11:19:47 PM
Darkcoin had first mover advantage doing POS. They're allowed to make mistakes and won't suffer harshly for it. If UTC goes the same direction, it will essentially have to fight an uphill battle towards attempting at perfection and will be punished horrible for every little mistake it makes. If the community and people that are part of UTC wanted this coin to flop and die, they would've left it long ago. All I can add to what the management should be doing is to not follow the trend of full pos and their subsequent failures, but keep at their original premise of being an asic resistant crypto currency. I have heard recently that Vertcoin isn't even asic resistent anymore so theres that... I'm sure given time, people will start migrating and rediscovering UTC's value. If dev team wanted, they can decrease the block reward further to restrict the amount of coins generated a day they can simply reduce the block reward. As stated over and over again, 43,200 UTC is generated a day. which is around .8-1.1 bitcoins that can and will be dumped a day. By reducing the block reward to 5, they can reduce that number to .28-.37 btc that can be potentially dumped a day. It is reasonable to maintain this value with the given market. UTC will eventually rise as a result of this action. What was .28-.37 will attempt to return to the norm of .8-1.1 BTC. I agree with the previous posts. I can't ask where the devs had received their advice, but it is extremely ill advised to go full POS when that type of model hasn't even been around for a long enough period to be truly understood and scrutinized.
July 05, 2014, 10:30:06 PM
Miners dumping coins on exchanges was never your problem. That's the only thing this full PoS solution really solves.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
An argument supported by math and logic. Let's see how many people rip this apart with "NUH-UH YOU TROLL" and other emotionally fueled arguments with no substance.
July 05, 2014, 10:14:52 PM
Miners dumping coins on exchanges was never your problem. That's the only thing this full PoS solution really solves.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
+1
Heh...Obviously you weren't one of the "experts" they consulted in regards to going full POS. Too bad.
July 05, 2014, 09:06:42 PM
*SIGH* Another day of no multipool payouts. What's the problem this time? Think I'll be moving on for now.
July 05, 2014, 08:59:03 PM
Miners dumping coins on exchanges was never your problem. That's the only thing this full PoS solution really solves.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice. PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned. It will be fine... initially. There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.
But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle. I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.
If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period. You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number. That's assuming none of them ever move them.
Which is the other problem with PoS. The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer. After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier. New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.
Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage. How are you going to market that?
"Hey, we're full PoS! The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."
The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months. It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer. You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community. The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.
The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further. But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.
July 05, 2014, 08:42:18 PM
@King_pin
before you say anything serious or want to start an voting maybe it is better you come up with good arguments and proof about your dangerous accusation's, lies and fud spreading you did today before.
So please where is your proof
?;POS/POW together is a good idea, bot going 100% POS will be the end of UTC!!!
Obviously I have been mining longer then they have been developing!
Going full POS offers nothing new, it offers death.
.......
The dev team is not making enough money, and that is why they want to go POS.
They obviously have lots of UTC and no hashing power, that is why they want to go full POS.
They have been stealing shares from their new dev. pool since day one, now this.... OMFG
Obviously I have been mining longer then they have been developing!
Going full POS offers nothing new, it offers death.
.......
The dev team is not making enough money, and that is why they want to go POS.
They obviously have lots of UTC and no hashing power, that is why they want to go full POS.
They have been stealing shares from their new dev. pool since day one, now this.... OMFG
July 05, 2014, 08:28:14 PM
Did you really just say this? Maybe I am interpreting this wrong, but all I get out of this statement is
"If the decision to go full POS doesn't work out, don't blame the guys in charge, blame the nay-sayers."
Wait what? So the people that are opposing full POS are to blame if full POS doesn't work out. I'm at a loss here as to how you are making that logical jump. Talk about blame shifting and the change hasn't even happened yet.
"If the decision to go full POS doesn't work out, don't blame the guys in charge, blame the nay-sayers."
Wait what? So the people that are opposing full POS are to blame if full POS doesn't work out. I'm at a loss here as to how you are making that logical jump. Talk about blame shifting and the change hasn't even happened yet.
Wake up dude.
I guess you are miss interpreting yes and you take everything out of context because you only take a view lines of text from that whole statement.
If you read better or interpretate better and try to read between the lines you see that the message is like this in my opinion:
>There are pros and cons
>That's ok
>When the discourse is with good arguments it is welcome
>But now this discourse goes the wrong way, it is getting personal and with attacks without any good arguments or even with lies
>This is harming UTC big
>New investors or traders will be scared away because of the continuous attacks
>So if UTC fails or full pos fails a big reason will be that the attackers scared away possible new investors
Guy’s,
What I see the last day is only talking negative shit from a little group of so called "members".
We have community members who are positive to full pos and also community members who are negative.
That’s all ok as long if there is normal discussion about the pros and cons.
But what I see now is that some little group of "members" starting with negativity, false accusations and with personal attacks without any proof.
Next to that I see that we are going back to the time from a view weeks ago when the thread was full of negativity, attacks, provoking and trying people to influence.
Please understand this;
You can be against full pos, but what some “members” are doing now is destroying UTC by constant putting fud on the tread.
So if UTC is going down it is not of changing in to full pos but because of those “members” who are fudding and attacking UTC.
It is as simple as that!
What I see the last day is only talking negative shit from a little group of so called "members".
We have community members who are positive to full pos and also community members who are negative.
That’s all ok as long if there is normal discussion about the pros and cons.
But what I see now is that some little group of "members" starting with negativity, false accusations and with personal attacks without any proof.
Next to that I see that we are going back to the time from a view weeks ago when the thread was full of negativity, attacks, provoking and trying people to influence.
Please understand this;
You can be against full pos, but what some “members” are doing now is destroying UTC by constant putting fud on the tread.
So if UTC is going down it is not of changing in to full pos but because of those “members” who are fudding and attacking UTC.
It is as simple as that!
July 05, 2014, 07:42:29 PM
Ifthere is a vote now, I would vote:
Prostpone
First there is the reason I and few others pointed:
- Scrypt-N currencies are most likely to go up in hashrate and price.
Second UTC price is relatively stable or even going up a lil, there is no need to do anything harsh.
Third lets not do the same mistake as DarkCoin did with their releases. we must have a 110% working stable release, than a good advertising campaign than release it.
Fourth you should stick to a plan once you announce it - meaning finish all other developments first.
And there is CaiShen or CAIx look at what happened after it went full POS... its worth less than 10% of what it used to be when it was Scrypt-N.
Prostpone
First there is the reason I and few others pointed:
- Scrypt-N currencies are most likely to go up in hashrate and price.
Second UTC price is relatively stable or even going up a lil, there is no need to do anything harsh.
Third lets not do the same mistake as DarkCoin did with their releases. we must have a 110% working stable release, than a good advertising campaign than release it.
Fourth you should stick to a plan once you announce it - meaning finish all other developments first.
And there is CaiShen or CAIx look at what happened after it went full POS... its worth less than 10% of what it used to be when it was Scrypt-N.
July 05, 2014, 07:41:08 PM
Please understand this;
You can be against full pos, but what some “members” are doing now is destroying UTC by constant putting fud on the tread.
So if UTC is going down it is not of changing in to full pos but because of those “members” who are fudding and attacking UTC.
It is as simple as that!
You can be against full pos, but what some “members” are doing now is destroying UTC by constant putting fud on the tread.
So if UTC is going down it is not of changing in to full pos but because of those “members” who are fudding and attacking UTC.
It is as simple as that!
Did you really just say this? Maybe I am interpreting this wrong, but all I get out of this statement is
"If the decision to go full POS doesn't work out, don't blame the guys in charge, blame the nay-sayers."
Wait what? So the people that are opposing full POS are to blame if full POS doesn't work out. I'm at a loss here as to how you are making that logical jump. Talk about blame shifting and the change hasn't even happened yet.
July 05, 2014, 07:40:41 PM
Let me speak, and I said this 1000 times! There is more coins coming in every week and if UTC does not do anything drastic it will die sooner than later if nothing is done, now that management decided to do something about it comes complains and if they do nothing they also complain. UTC has to be different from the rest, has something unique to succeed among the so many coins that are out there. If you have a normal coin it will eventually die, Do you know why this coin has survived? because it has one of the biggest community and that is the main reason if it was not for it this coin would have been dead long time ago, this coin being done by bumface and he being one of the moderator of BTC-e make UTC very popular and lots of BTC-e customer bought UTC for that reason. Now trolls and negative and positive people. We need to advertise and get this coin to a multinational level...make it join a bank, a big company, That UTC relate to something Huge. STop talking about nonsense, TO BE POS OR NOT TO BE POS? that's rubbish! Either way will die eventually if UTC does not join a big organization or institution!
July 05, 2014, 03:29:57 PM
I'm curious as to what defines a "large" holder of UTC any more.
Anyone?..Ballpark?
For the record, I'm agnostic on the POS issue and I've had UTC from the beginning. I can see where there are legitimate concerns by members of this community, perceived troll or not, and I certainly understand the attraction of going POS and I see the downside. If the UTC Dev's said they came by their decision after speaking to the experts then it would follow that they were convinced enough by those discussions to warrant the change.
I certainly don't have any reason to doubt their conclusions, but it's obvious they a lot of people would benefit to hear those same arguments that persuaded the devs, and how they came to their conclusion that going POS was the right thing to do for UTC in the long term.
I'd be pretty disappointed to see this discussion go down like the dcgirl mess, with people involved with UTC getting frustrated, leaving, dumping, and then becoming yet another negative spokesperson for UTC. That doesn't help anyone.
July 05, 2014, 03:18:00 PM
Beave, its obvious what your intentions are.. Which are not any better than the accusations you make towards others. I havent seen you make 1 positive comment on tyhis thread, since the beginning of it... No matter what choice was made.. So could you please leave and taje your negativity somehere else please? If you have this much knowledge how come your coin sux?
Um... what do you think my intentions are? And I have made more than 1 positive, so you are just wrong ...YACoin is not MY coin. I have made no contributions to the development of the wallet, miner, or website. I like not being in a cult. In fact, I'm going to finally remove that logo as the perception of centralized control is growing in crypto in general. Thanks.
EDIT: Apparently, I'm not allowed to change my avator?
July 05, 2014, 03:14:28 PM
To Levole11 and all others, can you remember this message?
About the trollers;
> The trollers will never stop with nagging and sucking blood.
> Their task is to hurt and damage the founder and our Ultracoin.
> So they are hurting and damaging all of us by that task they gave their self to do.
Don't feed the trolls; --> This is very important <--
> If you write a message in this tread then please remember how important it is to stay serious and positive.
> If you read a troll message, a troll attack or a message which is full of negativity or fud, then please be strong and simply do not respond and do not answer even
though the temptation could be great to do that.
> Please understand well that the trollers are working together only to provoke, hurt and damage UTC and the UTC community.
> By not answering and ignoring the trolls and their provoking fud messages you are doing really the best thing you can do for UTC and thus for your self.
I know it is difficult (also for me) but it is still the best advise ever....
July 05, 2014, 02:59:16 PM
Centralization and manipulation is not only immoral--it will not work. The price of UTC may rise slightly and briefly, but it will decline big time in the long run because what intelligent person WITH MONEY would want to invest in something that has and will most certainly be manipulated by a few bagholders trying to get to a certain price at the expense of others?
I'm not sure why some are posting comments now. This precedent was set a long time ago, and I saw full POS coming. They will manipulate again I absolutely promise you.
The POS money ship has sailed. The Scrypt-N coins have yet to see their day, but it is coming. CACHEcoin is coming back from the dead, and it has a high POS reward. There is a lot of hope in scrypt-chacha, but I don't think the ones in 'power' will ever understand.
Why not just create another coin altogether? Do you think it will be easier to market a coin that doesn't have a history of issues and steady decline? You can do another IPO and buy more scrypt asics. You may make up all of your losses from UTC with an initial pump if you market it right--call it SuperUltraCoin.
I'm not sure why some are posting comments now. This precedent was set a long time ago, and I saw full POS coming. They will manipulate again I absolutely promise you.
The POS money ship has sailed. The Scrypt-N coins have yet to see their day, but it is coming. CACHEcoin is coming back from the dead, and it has a high POS reward. There is a lot of hope in scrypt-chacha, but I don't think the ones in 'power' will ever understand.
Why not just create another coin altogether? Do you think it will be easier to market a coin that doesn't have a history of issues and steady decline? You can do another IPO and buy more scrypt asics. You may make up all of your losses from UTC with an initial pump if you market it right--call it SuperUltraCoin.
Beave, its obvious what your intentions are.. Which are not any better than the accusations you make towards others. I havent seen you make 1 positive comment on tyhis thread, since the beginning of it... No matter what choice was made.. So could you please leave and taje your negativity somehere else please? If you have this much knowledge how come your coin sux?
July 05, 2014, 02:50:18 PM
Centralization and manipulation is not only immoral--it will not work. The price of UTC may rise slightly and briefly, but it will decline big time in the long run because what intelligent person WITH MONEY would want to invest in something that has and will most certainly be manipulated by a few bagholders trying to get to a certain price at the expense of others?
I'm not sure why some are posting comments now. This precedent was set a long time ago, and I saw full POS coming. They will manipulate again I absolutely promise you.
The POS money ship has sailed. The Scrypt-N coins have yet to see their day, but it is coming. CACHEcoin is coming back from the dead, and it has a high POS reward. There is a lot of hope in scrypt-chacha, but I don't think the ones in 'power' will ever understand.
Why not just create another coin altogether? Do you think it will be easier to market a coin that doesn't have a history of issues and steady decline? You can do another IPO and buy more scrypt asics. You may make up all of your losses from UTC with an initial pump if you market it right--call it SuperUltraCoin.
I'm not sure why some are posting comments now. This precedent was set a long time ago, and I saw full POS coming. They will manipulate again I absolutely promise you.
The POS money ship has sailed. The Scrypt-N coins have yet to see their day, but it is coming. CACHEcoin is coming back from the dead, and it has a high POS reward. There is a lot of hope in scrypt-chacha, but I don't think the ones in 'power' will ever understand.
Why not just create another coin altogether? Do you think it will be easier to market a coin that doesn't have a history of issues and steady decline? You can do another IPO and buy more scrypt asics. You may make up all of your losses from UTC with an initial pump if you market it right--call it SuperUltraCoin.
July 05, 2014, 02:41:49 PM
If I may give any sort advice to all of you then it would be this : Ignore list
Al other actions or response will hurt your coin more and more.
July 05, 2014, 02:27:35 PM
After going full pos how many coins will be released for the market ?do we have a number for that??? ...at this moment there are 16.900.000 UTC. Also i wonder why too many trollers like flobdeth or king_pin complaining about bugholders when you can even be a bugholder just buying the hell out of ultracoin by rising also the price with only 5-10 btc....All i can say is go buy some coins support the devs work positively for the community ,remove sell orders, and shut the fuck up by letting the dev's do their job.
The coins coming on the market each day will be factor 19 less then now..
Jump to: