Topic: [ANN] Catcoin - Scrypt meow! - page 152. (Read 470764 times)

If someone can translate OP to chinese and post in chinese section and 1-2 chinese cryptocoins sites, then we may get some hashrate improvement.

Our favorate coin is back on track and gaining some value again

I agree with you that expressing opinions about what the value of the coin should be is not irrational, and the specific amount expressed may very well have a lot of logical support. What I was saying is merely that suggesting this number seemed to cause a lot of people to temporarily choose their buying/selling based upon it, which looks to have temporarily boosted the value of the coin (and causing a subsequent minor market adjustment). Nothing wrong with expressing opinions, and nothing wrong with people liking the expressed opinion and acting on it - the entire discussion thread here I am sure has up and down effects on people's estimation of the value of the coin, and none of it is wrong or artificial. What I meant to say is that putting a specific number on the ratio of values, might not have been the best thing, simply because the market has a way of setting value (based on supply/demand), and if people made buying and selling decisions based on this suggested ratio, and found the market picked some other value, it might have created a disillusionment effect. But this is a very very minor thing, and I am not intending to criticize the person who had the thought of putting a value on it. Heck, anyone who said anything positive and aspirational about where CATs can go, could have caused people to buy a bunch of coins, then later become disillusioned too. But I think most importantly, people posting their perspectives will allow more ideas to be vetted and hopefully the Catcoin supporting community will find creative ways to promote the coin, and find a way to overcome minor challenges (like unstable hashrates and difficulty levels), and achieve a steady and healthy growth in the stable hashrate and value of the coins.

0.0001 is not irrational. Even IXCoins are higher than that. Hell DevCoins are worth more than Dogecoins.

No one would sell below the POWER cost and quantitative projection value PLUS the USE VALUE of having BITCOIN without the creeping friendliness toward regulation.

CATCOIN isn't merely an ALT. It's a full on correction to the passive ideology that has infected the One Troo Coin.

Representation of money is worthless.

Value is king.

Making coins to dump to a rickety unhinged fiat is delusional.

I'm holding on and microtrading at 1 BTC = 1 CAT.

I'll address this too. I agree with you that putting a number on the value of Catcoins like 0.0001 was unwise/unfortunate, in that it caused a pumping effect. But I don't think it was any more or less "artificial" than anyone else expressing opinions about the value and potentials of the coin. Nobody to my knowledge had the coercive governmantal or central bank powers to enforce this suggested index. It was sort of like a meme or fad that kind of stuck.

I think suggesting that people adjust their timing to start and stop mining Catcoins (if they are on that cycle), in such a way that it correctly signals to the network their intent, which has the beneficial effect of evening out the difficulty curve, is a purely constructive suggestion, and neither you nor anyone else has described any scenario under which this action can cause an undesirable effect for the long-term success of Catcoins. I am not suggesting anything requiring changes to the Catcoin code, hard fork, etc., and it does not require unanimious participation. It's just that the more people who choose to behave in this way, the more the difficult adjustment (based on estimated hashrate) will match the actual hashrate of the network for any given difficulty stage. If anyone can point out how this can harm the reputation or long-term prospects of the coin, please describe the scenario of how that would come about. Thank you.

+100 cats from me, same mode.
we are trying to buy some time for promotion -

@ kalus i see your many points free market etc. and appreciate your brains involved in the thread. agree better not pay dumpers high price, and even let them dump at lower price because the low hash figures.

i believe however without some community sacrifice, a non-premined/pre-marketed coin has little chance, just by luck parhaps. what we are trying is to build up wider base of long-term investors into the CAT project, who would invest their hash now. maybe then we can agree on coordinated action with such "trusted miners", as to when to step in to give life suport... no?

I will donate up to 100 CATs for anyone who switches from mining non-CAT coins to mining CAT, at the rate of 1 CAT per megahash for the duration of the current difficulty level. Just tell me in PM how many megahashes you've switched over, and give me your word you will keep mining CATs until the end of the current difficulty, and I will send you the corresponding CATs as donation. This is purely on an honors system, since I have no way to verify. Once I've donated 100 CATs, this offer expires. Others may make a similar offer, and my offer is valid in combination of any of their offers.

that's laudable, however most people here are interested in making money.  

I have a vested interest, but the big difference is, i never decided i "like catcoins".  sorry, that's an emotional, not a rational motivator, and i do not invest on emotions.  for me, that's a core doctrine.  

My vested interest is financial.  i know when i got into catcoins, and i know when i'm getting out of catcoins.  

Catcoin looked interesting because it was based on the same parameters as bitcoin.  

The argument that we should use novel ideas 'some other altcoin supporters pick up on this idea' is no reason to act preemptively.


You have not responded to the idea that catcoin was artificially indexed at 0.0001.  this initial speculation, starting days before cryptsy, caused the problem of unsustainable growth in hashrate, not the miners.  

an auto-switch mining pool operates purely on financial opportunity.  it is not based on speculation, but on what the currency is trading with.  if you claim "you want to see [catcoin] succeed", you're spouting ideology which may be independent of sound financial strategy.  

@ kalus please... don't need it... opinions are opinions, we all are in this for our own reasons...

i on behalf of the greater catcoin community am kindly requesting the help of any miner that would be willing to turn his attention this way in recognition that the survival of this coin is good for all involved for whatever reason that is
i kindly thank you for your support
pm me if it's a matter of negotiations
thank you
the catcoin community

I will not address your various attacks and assertions in response to my legitimate points. But you ask a couple of legitimate question here, which I will address. 1) Why do I say there is a weakness in the difficulty adjustment algorithm? Because the main productive value in mining, is in providing cryptographically secure validations of transactions - so to the extent people mining a coin suffer losses, and people who pump up and crash difficulty levels profit - is the extent to which the difficulty adjustment algorithm is failing to act in accordance with its intended purpose. A coin is more secure and useful by having a more-or-less consistent and rising difficulty level with reasonably consistent block solution times, than one that oscillates between extremely difficult with very long block solution times and extremely easy with extremely short block solution times; 2) Why do I bring this up specifically in a Catcoin thread, and not in other threads? Because I decided I like Catcoins, mined and bought a bunch, have a vested interest, and continue to mine and buy bunches more and want to see it succeed, to pad my own wealth (and that of fellow Catcoin supporters), by means of this success. Other altcoins may then benefit from emulating the success, but that is a side-benefit for them (and probably a lesser benefit than Catcoin will see, because the first mover has the advantage). [Insert whatever "rules of acquisition" you find appropriate here.] Now, what about if some other altcoin supporters pick up this idea and act on it before Catcoin supporters act on it? I would find that unfortunate (looking at my Catcoin wallet), but hopefully that would not happen.

appeal to authority.  reject as fallacious.

 incorrect, overly broad and lacks nuance. also, this diverts us away from the original argument:  you have yet to justify why you want to manipulate catcoin's protocol by controlling miners, when this is intervention isn't needed for other healthy currencies.  

You are proposing changes to the way blocks are made in an unprecedented way.  you have yet to explain why an exception should be made to catcoin, especially as its fidelity to bitcoin is used as a frequent selling point.  

non sequitor.

you claim:

.  this is implying that what was agreed upon initially by all market participants:  the catcoin protocol, has a weakness.  you have yet to explain why this weakness is unique to catcoin and needs to be corrected.  

as stated originally, i consider your strategy to artifically maintain the hashrate instead of allowing the market to naturally determine how valuable catcoin should really be to be protectionist.


i will not engage with your straw man, sorry.

 feel free to fight with yourself.


let catcoin float on the free market without altering how we mine catcoin and trade catcoin.  this is the only way it will survive.

today, instead of bitching and moaning about the loss of hashrate, i went out and made 50 catcoins.  that's what a rational, free market operation should do:  view crashes just like any other arbitrage opportunity rather than the end of the world.  

would any of you miners mind donating some hashes i think it's important to all
i mean we really could use a boost to our hashrates they're kind of down

OK

Very well.

Proposition: Saying calling something a "market manipulation" in a forum of die-hard dedicated proponents of the free market, Austrian-economics oriented cryptocurrency, amounts to calling it morally wrong.

Arguments: 1) This is almost a tautology - which is an argument in itself. 2) To a free-market proponent, "market manipulation" commonly refers to actions by coercive governments and central banks, to cause situations to exist in the marketplace which could not have come about through the voluntary interaction among legitimate market participants, i.,e., people who have no power except to produce and trade. Since I have demonstrated no coercive or central bank powers (I only have powers to produce and trade, just like you), your use of the term "market manipulation" must be an analogous reference versus referring to literal effect-of-coercive-action-in-fact. This being the case, the only conceivable analogous reference, is to tarnish my reputation and that of my proposed constructive cooperative action, by creating a pejorative tie-in with what virtually everyone on this forum would agree is morally reprehensible - the actions of coercive governments and central banks. Therefore, unless you supply some alternative explanation, your use of the phrase "market manipulation" has to mean "immoral" but you intended to have the effect of declaring a moral condemnation, while trying not to appear moralistic. But this being a free market friendly forum, that's about as moralistic as you can get.

And UP we GO!

Holidays over. People getting their monies in from JAN 2nd paydays heh...

Someone needed to shake things up with that minicrash. You can never get enough liquidity.

Ok, now I get why you guys stop mining catcoins - to scare weak hand speculators out But don't forget to switch back your miners when the diff drops 

Yup! MORE CHEAP CATCOINS!!!
 

that was not your original argument.

Additionally, you make this claim:

This is your claim, but you do not support it argumentatively.  You simply state: "it's just another way of saying..." i reject the equivalency as a non sequitor:  one train of thought does not follow to the conclusion you make.

I don't need to explain your strawman.


you still have not addressed the huge problem speculators created when they indexed catcoin at 0.0001.  this was pointed out a few posts back, and i pointed out there's no rational reason it should be valued as such.  this was the real cause of the problem, not the miners.