Topic: [ANN] [CLOAK] Cloakcoin | No Premine | X13 | Decentralized Market and PoSA - page 561. (Read 1266571 times)

Help community !

My coins has been stolen by a hacker. I have lost 28`184 Cloak coins. It was everything I had. Everything I have worked for during my time in Crypto. I don`t like the idea of asking for donations but I am lost what to do. Any help, financially or otherwise, would be appreciated greatly !

C3dKv42yAG7QdWUhMaTR45yTeW4CRXcWxy

I'm getting the feeling that Kitaco's biggest problem is that Cloakcoin isn't making him a millionaire fast enough. Some of his concerns are valid. But, he seems to be overly vocal to the point of seeming bitter and angry now.

Just trying to stick to the facts.
So, after you wanted to buy 7500 cloakcoins, you created an irc bot to support the community - though it was a flawed clone of someone else's work.

So your cloakcoin timeline is:

• you tried to buy a large amount of cloak
• then tried to improve the irc for favors from the OP
• repeatedly told everyone in irc you'd done more for cloak than anyone because of this cloned bot
• received no special treatment and got banned from irc for being generally mean spirited and difficult to anyone trying to participate
• and now you're flaming the BCT thread like a wounded girlfriend

It reminds me of a particular 80's movie. Tell me, have you boiled any rabbits lately?

I think that equating the system to a political construct isn't a good analogy. As they say, "All politics are local". Generally speaking politics are very geocentric. Whatever your geographic locale is will likely determine your or greatly influence your political leanings. Thankfully cryptocurrenices have no such problem. As long as jury members are picked in a random and fair way it's highly unlikely they'll be politically influenced.

After a long talk on the IRC channel, I've come to some solutions to this issue.  This will be extremely technical in nature so if someone wants to sum up what I write here in an easy way to explain please do so.  This is a rough draft so if you see any errors point them out and I'll fix it.

Anyone can be a reviewer, they simply broadcast out their public key of their cloak address saying they are a reviewer.  This gets stored in a separate ledger database on everyones computer in the p2p network.  If your broadcast does not appear within 2 hours of your last broadcast your account is removed from the ledger until you broadcast to the network again.  This will prevent bloating of the review ledger and keep only active reviewers.

To prevent spam, listings are required to pay a transaction fee that has to be approved by at least 11 confirmations before a listing is eligible for reviewers to accept.  Since this has to occur anyways, during each of the staking processes, the stakee can elect two* (arbitrary value, will be explained later) random reviewers from the ledger using a basic random function for each listing that needs a review.  :: (Yes this vote could be manipulated, but read on) :: They secure their vote by signing it into the blockchain with their public key and in this way decide what reviewers they want for 'what listing'.  In this way separate reviewers are constantly selected for listings and can be verified to be random by anyone reading the blockchain.  The trick is... a reviewer can NOT be assigned again for the same listing OR by the SAME PERSON STAKING for (Expiration time of the listing calculated by hours worth of blocks).  So if the listing expires in 7 days, each block in Cloakcoin is 60 seconds, that would be 60 blocks an hour multiplied by 24 hours in day for 1440 blocks.  Multiply that by 7 and every 10080 blocks the original Staker will be eligible to vote again.

Reviews are accepted on a first come first serve basis as they populate into their review cue in the client and only active reviewers are being sent reviews so it will be competitive to pick them up quickly.

The following above would be hard to game since you would need to control a massive amount of the stake in cloak to get a chance of getting a manipulated vote in for the reviewer and even then you could only hope to gain '1' vote and your stake vote only counts once every (Expiration time of listing hours worth of blocks).  Your listing would either be disapproved or approved by that point.  Because certain individuals will control stake more often, this is why I believe two* should be chosen at once since some block rounds won't be generating any new reviewers for a listing.  I may need to adjust this number to three or four, we'll have to play around with it.

Doing this makes it impractical to try and game the system and the votes, especially since you can not vote for a reviewer on the same stake more than (Expiration time of the listing calculated by hours worth of blocks) time.

Let me know if this makes any sense and if you have any questions.


EDIT **

I would like to mention that the person who stakes can not vote period again until the expiration time.  If they win stake simply they do not vote, which is why multiple reviewers should be selected at one time by a valid staker.

EDIT **

To prevent spamming the reviewer ledger with (look, I'm a reviewer!), a deposit will be required = to average transaction fee for ledgers.  If you review at least once within 2 hours your deposit is refunded, otherwise it will go to miners.

Can onemarket best be described as a republic or a democracy?
Sure, MOST people are good, but.......

Also, an example of pure democracy in action is a lynch mob

Also consider the Lakota philosophy of the 7th generation,
Which in the altcoin world might be a week, kinda like dog years
What foundational elements can ensure (support ) that things won't just degrade
Into trash ?  Cloak has a unique opportunity to go where no
Coin has gone before, this is a real opportunity
Just my 2 satoshis

PoSA was an inside job. This thread is literally making Baby Jesus cry.

Of course, that was my point. I was just replying to someone who viewed it as if the devs made a mistake by setting up a deadline when they did. It's very well possible that they purposely missed the deadline -- in the end, it probably would be more profitable that way.

Yes, the market is totally unable to determine on their own what this coins development has actually done. Come dev... make up some good news so the market will pump the coin.

Pretty soon, many coins will have bullet-proof working anon. IMHO, One Market gives a compelling reason to use and invest in Cloakcoin.

Dev can easily manipulate the market with either good news or bad news, it's just a game for profit that's nothing new.

I'm buying and taking 70k as the new floor, get that posa out and we'll be looking at 160-175k

As for one market i'm not so sure. To be blunt i don't think cloak needs it. By all means a separate application, however i won't be comfortable with a wallet that also allows trading illegal items or services, there are other ways of doing that  

bulletproof working anon is much more desirable.

Wow, why am I not surprised.

Something I find interesting is how they set up their PoSA countdown -- hype generated, prices went up 2-3x, then sort of semi-silence (besides the fixing bugs stuff). Deadlines are one thing and even missing them isn't the end of the World, but when any dev sets up a deadline, even a minor miss can have pretty drastic effects.

But as to what is potentially interesting and I have wondered about is... is it on purpose? I expect a smart dev could have looked at Drk, how they handled their release candidates and thought to themselves -- why can't I do the same thing?  Probably more money was made on Drk by releasing a bad fork, than a good one... silence and delays lower the price a bit more. Those who sold at 2-3x prices can buy back in at really cheap levels, and all a dev has to do then is release whatever it was they were working on, Release candidate in Drk's case, or PoSA here. More money to be made that way than a proper release on time.

I may be too skeptical, but again, just something I wonder about sometimes. Devs can influence price down easier than they can up, and sometimes it's to their advantage.

Well the quorum can be adjusted for supermajority, instead of 6 out of 11, it could be 7 or 8, to make it harder to buy enough coins to control the jurors.

Nice to meet you X11 JOE keep up doing the great work.

World cup is over! so back to business buying cloakcoin LONG TERM Investment!

This coin need some Hyping. dont worry i will counteratack the trolls MWHAHHAAHAHA

Kitaco, after Kryptonite, you are quickly becoming the official antagonist of cloakcoin. 

in a way I like you, you are not so bad. You are entitled to your opinions, and some of your points are interesting and valid. Just ease on the gas pedal a bit, you don't have to be so forceful with your opinions.
Who knows, maybe in the end we can all benefit from your doubts!

actually the price dropped quite a bit lower than that, then rose to the current mid seventies. that 1240 bid on mintpal has gone unfilled for four hours now. asks are thin. people are holding. just one or two large buys would put us back right back in the 90s. so the the sky is not exactly falling.

as for this kitco guy, don't know what is up with him. either trying to scare people into selling so he can get coins, or he has a knife to grind with cloak. whatever.

anyone looking at this coin should ignore his ranting & evaluate Cloak with all due diligence, certainly studying the following elements:

- proposed anon solution
- total number of coins / market cap
- current technical standpoint of XC, DRK, VRC  - what has been implemented, what is in the pipeline where are the difficulties.
- current market prognosis of those same three coins (study the charts, analyse how many bagholders at the various historic price levels, short & medium term probabilities, etc)
- then do the research and due diligence on cloak itself. the devs, the solutions, the roadmap, the openess of communication with the stakeholders, current outlook, especially the 4 hr chart.

don't listen to lunatics raving in forums.

I like the way you rationalize x11Joe, you are a clever fellow indeed. Not everybody can come out with this kind of thoughts. Congratulations.

- I Still have a few stupid questions for those just in case scenarios...

What if the listee with bad intentions is prepared? for example He/She/entity owns let's say 25 % of the coins in 15000 staking wallets. Doesn't this mean that his chances of getting 6 out of the 11 review invitations are greatly enhanced ? And if he keeps on pushing and trying, at some stage He will get those 6/11 reviews, and can control the vote?.... Not saying this will happen, and probably plutonium dealers have other sources of selling it than cloak, but who's to say? ( I guess there is nothing to do and that is just the way it is..)

- What about outright bribery ? The listee proposes to pay 1 btc to the reviewers upon proof of voting for his successful cause? etc..

Thanks for your time and effort in answering these bothersome questions..

Every coin has it's followers and every coin has it's haters.

This is no different. However, it's the coins that produce based on quality devs that will prevail. This coin has a great number of people backing it. What i'll never understand is why people who hate the coin so much, continue to post here. I mean, I've supported a TON of coins in the past and when the dev abandons it, so do the people. Yet this coin has the same people posting FUD daily... hourly at that.

It's fine, we learn to read it and roll our eyes as we move on. I'm not sure who they're trying to convince, us or themselves, that it's anything other that an amazing coin.