Topic: [ANN] [CLOAK] Cloakcoin | No Premine | X13 | Decentralized Market and PoSA - page 829. (Read 1266574 times)
June 14, 2014, 04:53:30 PM
MAX_MONEY is a bullshit number. Some devs don't even bother to change it because it doesn't effect anything important. The best way to limit coins is to set an end point of coin generation or use block halving.
June 14, 2014, 04:08:42 PM
LMAO.. honeybadger is a fucking troll... Anyone who listens to him deserves what`s coming to them!
tf2honeybadger is not a troll, is the administrator.
cloak turned out bad, has a number of programming errors...
Please, enlightn us on the programming errors. Show us where it goes "wrong"..
I have seen the code and it's fine. You are just another fudder who has no idea what he is talking about.
There is nothing wrong with the code. Polo can take a shit on itself for this fud. They are not qualified to host an exchange. Oh and when did they review asiacoin or whitecoin code? Supporting malicious thug coins since the beginning.
This is the only fair criticism I've seen so far. I'm guessing their response would be that they're playing closer attention now in response to the outrage over the scams you've mentioned and the many others that have followed - basically, we buyers are getting sick of this scam/clone/no-innovation/bad-"innovation" crap and we're now going to see exchanges (hopefully) get more serious about quality control and listing requirements because buyers are increasingly demanding it.
They should start by cleaning their own house instead of spreading fud about unlisted coins. If they did a review we should expect a statement and decision outline - that's quality, and that's consumer protection. So far it is only unsubstantiated fud. Very unfair and sad. And what'd worse the fud is being propagated by yourself and other noobs whilst the devs work hard. Criminal.
Well, they're starting to. Be grateful you didn't get the SUPER treatment:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-poloniex-has-rejected-supercoin-652351
Which just destroyed that coin's price:
https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-SUPER
I'm not into coding, or reading the code. But what about what this guy is saying?
http://i58.tinypic.com/24445km.jpg
I no longer know what to think. If he's right, and Polo is wrong, then obviosuly Polo code reviews are worth shit...
The reason they didnt pull this on cloak is because the cloak code is sound. There IS no bad code.
June 14, 2014, 04:06:01 PM
June 14, 2014, 03:55:59 PM
LMAO.. honeybadger is a fucking troll... Anyone who listens to him deserves what`s coming to them!
tf2honeybadger is not a troll, is the administrator.
cloak turned out bad, has a number of programming errors...
Please, enlightn us on the programming errors. Show us where it goes "wrong"..
I have seen the code and it's fine. You are just another fudder who has no idea what he is talking about.
There is nothing wrong with the code. Polo can take a shit on itself for this fud. They are not qualified to host an exchange. Oh and when did they review asiacoin or whitecoin code? Supporting malicious thug coins since the beginning.
This is the only fair criticism I've seen so far. I'm guessing their response would be that they're playing closer attention now in response to the outrage over the scams you've mentioned and the many others that have followed - basically, we buyers are getting sick of this scam/clone/no-innovation/bad-"innovation" crap and we're now going to see exchanges (hopefully) get more serious about quality control and listing requirements because buyers are increasingly demanding it.
They should start by cleaning their own house instead of spreading fud about unlisted coins. If they did a review we should expect a statement and decision outline - that's quality, and that's consumer protection. So far it is only unsubstantiated fud. Very unfair and sad. And what'd worse the fud is being propagated by yourself and other noobs whilst the devs work hard. Criminal.
Well, they're starting to. Be grateful you didn't get the SUPER treatment:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-poloniex-has-rejected-supercoin-652351
Which just destroyed that coin's price:
https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-SUPER
I'm not into coding, or reading the code. But what about what this guy is saying?
I no longer know what to think. If he's right, and Polo is wrong, then obviosuly Polo code reviews are worth shit...
June 14, 2014, 03:52:28 PM
We built something that is extremely effective at anon, so good it made some people slightly nervous.... the exchanges.
Don't get hung up on version 1.0... We made it work, it was so much more complicated to do than a simple mixer... now we are going to blow that out the water with something new.
CloakSend 2.0 is coming and we won't even need exchanges or anything else that can be considered centralized.
It will be fully decentralized.... Anon 3.0
Don't get hung up on version 1.0... We made it work, it was so much more complicated to do than a simple mixer... now we are going to blow that out the water with something new.
CloakSend 2.0 is coming and we won't even need exchanges or anything else that can be considered centralized.
It will be fully decentralized.... Anon 3.0
June 14, 2014, 03:50:57 PM
871 
June 14, 2014, 03:47:02 PM
LMAO.. honeybadger is a fucking troll... Anyone who listens to him deserves what`s coming to them!
tf2honeybadger is not a troll, is the administrator.
cloak turned out bad, has a number of programming errors...
Please, enlightn us on the programming errors. Show us where it goes "wrong"..
I have seen the code and it's fine. You are just another fudder who has no idea what he is talking about.
There is nothing wrong with the code. Polo can take a shit on itself for this fud. They are not qualified to host an exchange. Oh and when did they review asiacoin or whitecoin code? Supporting malicious thug coins since the beginning.
This is the only fair criticism I've seen so far. I'm guessing their response would be that they're playing closer attention now in response to the outrage over the scams you've mentioned and the many others that have followed - basically, we buyers are getting sick of this scam/clone/no-innovation/bad-"innovation" crap and we're now going to see exchanges (hopefully) get more serious about quality control and listing requirements because buyers are increasingly demanding it.
They should start by cleaning their own house instead of spreading fud about unlisted coins. If they did a review we should expect a statement and decision outline - that's quality, and that's consumer protection. So far it is only unsubstantiated fud. Very unfair and sad. And what'd worse the fud is being propagated by yourself and other noobs whilst the devs work hard. Criminal.
Well, they're starting to. Be grateful you didn't get the SUPER treatment:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-poloniex-has-rejected-supercoin-652351
Which just destroyed that coin's price:
https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-SUPER
June 14, 2014, 03:43:29 PM
So... Is that really what they are being concerned about?
Yes, that should be the only reason. As multiple people have confirmed about the clean code. I appreciate you pasting this. Maybe TheDagger can explain to Busoni (Poloniex). Getting more exchanges will certainly help to improve Cloak value.
June 14, 2014, 03:40:26 PM
@coinasaur thats totally wrong .... we don´t need FUD for sure... but criticsm with a point should be spoken out... you cannot even see whats ur not exchanged estimated BTC/Cloak there... you can with most multipools
the BC multipool took over three weeks for that function to be active. Everything the dev of this coin has said was going to happen, happened. sometimes even AHEAD of schedule. All Im saying is for people to stop saying the multipool is broken because it is not and if they have an issue to take it up with the pool operator in PMs
EDIT and what part of my post is totally wrong? the part about the multipool working, the part about not needing negativity in the thread or the statement they released stating that payouts can sometimes take 48 hrs plus... because that is all true so I cant figure out where Im totally wrong. I never said criticism is bad, I said negativity is bad.
June 14, 2014, 03:33:59 PM
@coinasaur thats totally wrong .... we don´t need FUD for sure... but criticsm with a point should be spoken out... you cannot even see whats ur not exchanged estimated BTC/Cloak there... you can with most multipools
June 14, 2014, 03:32:07 PM
So... Is that really what they are being concerned about?
June 14, 2014, 03:11:47 PM
Less logo and voting talks and more fixing of multipool
+1
+2
-3
multipool seems to be working for me. I've gotten 2 payments for x11. They have stated that payments can be as long as 48 hrs or in some cases longer if they are waiting for a better price to sell the mined coins. Have faith or PM the operators. We don't need negativity in the thread right now. Too much good news happening right now
June 14, 2014, 03:04:22 PM
Less logo and voting talks and more fixing of multipool
June 14, 2014, 03:00:12 PM
June 14, 2014, 02:48:54 PM
So everyone sold their Cloak and went to watch football?
June 14, 2014, 02:43:43 PM
851 
June 14, 2014, 02:41:18 PM
Frequent voter here also
June 14, 2014, 02:23:18 PM
I'll keep voting whenever I can. It's moving up at least
No the price is going down.
June 14, 2014, 02:16:37 PM
I'll keep voting whenever I can. It's moving up at least
June 14, 2014, 02:11:34 PM
I'll be voting every hour I can until CloakCoin is #1!
Jump to: