Topic: [ANN] ¤ DMD Diamond 3.0 | Scarce ¤ Valuable ¤ Secure | PoS 3.0 | Masternodes 65% - page 598. (Read 1260677 times)

this 'cloudmining' should have zero to do with future development of DMD and needs to be ignored.

Does bitcoin change its code to cater for Nicehash ?


Just focus on community not one single person and all will be good.

so we open our mind and let u see what we think about the future
lets see if there are people in our community which think that they could support us make this happen

we went back in the lab and try to find a decentralized
solution but that still should be connected to dmd cloudmining shares

to make this happen dmd cloudmining shares must be visible in the blockchain

and following this ideas

fast things like assets and maybe even smart contracts come into ur mind

basical the stuff that people call core ideas of bitcoin v2

and all that work to run only one or two assets (cloud and reactor)

for sure not if we establish things that would be able run this we would find ways to allow other projects to run on it too

that the future will go into this direction is clear

the question is with what speed.......

and there we all look and wait for alex and news from his networking with cryptobusiness big players

everyone with a bit realistic view on development times know we talking here about months and not weeks

reactor in the form we designed it would have been active in a few weeks

but u want to go the long path and the high sophisticated decentralized solution

we hear u and go for it and beyond.......

That sounds like me. But how can I help if you do all yourself without telling anyone and just show us the finished product? Why must it be a mistery?

So you think its okay for the people who run this coin to set up a cloudmining service which they also run and profit from, then change the currency mechanics to offer a higher reward for the people who invest in their service?  Your argument is we can all invest in this scheme to enrich the people who run the cloudmining service and the currency at the same time?  You see no conlfict of interest in this?

Like I said earlier, if the cloudmining operators want to give a higher reward for Cloudmining investors they should take it out of their own pockets.  Changing the rules of the currency to attract investors because they can is just plain unethical.  

And for the record, I can afford to invest in cloudmining but I choose not to.  Its equally interesting to see the ones who support this scheme the most are the ones who invested in Cloudmining and benefit the most.

Let's be honest.  cloudmining BTC to buy DMD to boost the value of DMD is creating an artificial economy for DMD.  Yes, this is good for anyone who holds DMD.  But I am pretty sure if we were in a regulated market this will be illegal.   Then to argue that those who support cloudminging because it works this way deserves a bigger reward is ridiculous.  ANYONE who mines, buys and holds their DMDs is assisting in creating value for DMDs.  If the miners unload all their DMDs, the value will drop significantly and cloudmining cannot stop that.  This scheme only works because volume is so low.  I am not against cloudmining.  It has clearly resulted in a higher value for DMDs but investors in cloudmining are getting their reward from blocks found.  Creating an incentive for others to invest in cloudmining using the currency itself is wrong.  It surprises me that some people don't see this.

I think any mechanism you set up should not favor any one DMD investor over another.  That seems to be completely contradictory to the principals of cryptocoining.  If the owners of the cloudmining service want to pay the reward out of their own pockets, that's up to them, but to create a facility to do it within the mechanics of the coin is unethical.  Its a conflict of interest because those running cloudmining also run DMD.  I read comments where people say, "I trust so-and-so".  I we were talking about a stock, a commodity or US dollars on a regulated exchange, would you make that same statement?  Do you think people trusted the operators of Mt. Gox?   Its not about trust.  Its about running this currency like professionals in an above board, unquestioned way.  Outside investors and commerce partners need to see this if we want them to work with us.

I know they people running DMD have tried to drive this coin into commerce but no one is going to exchange a product or service for a currency that has no controls, no operating principals and no stability.  At the end of the day its about putting food on the table which means its about money.  We should always operate as if we are a well regulated issuers of a currency.

Personally, I don't care either way.  I invest my time and resources into mining DMD with the intent of recouping my investment and hopefully making a profit.  But I have no delusions about DMD.  In about 6 months the reward will drop to .1 and I have no idea what the difficulty will rise to before then.  From a profitability perspective mining will be so far underwater for GPU miners it would be insane to mine this coin.  Perhaps ASICs can save them but that would involved yet another financial investment.  




[/quote]

DMDCreeper - I like how you wrote what you did.  It makes sense when laid out that way and doesn't seem like a rant.  Maybe I am missing something in terms of the reactor and how it would affect others.  I have no problem with the cloud mining service creating buy pressure on the coin because there is not a lot of volume to be had anyway.  The cloud mining mechanism is needed until the community gets larger and the coin becomes useable which in turn will create demand.  I think what the Dev's have planned for this coin can help create that demand.

Boffin - here here - agree entirely.  I am not sure where all of the whining came from?  If people don't want to invest they don't have to.  I would have gladly bought up more of the reactor slots so that we could have gotten it started as I am sure others would have.  Locking up 100,000 DMD in a stake vehicle would have been nice and slowly released DMD's to us.  I hope the Dev team wasn't strong armed into canceling this project.  Because those of us with a stake in the project (I will assume the majority) were for the reactor!  Anyway - I am along for the ride.  Let's see where this thing can go.

Hi people,

I strongly disagree with this type of sentiment, and believe the best part of reactor was the link to cloudmining. Why should those people who support buy pressure on DMD not be rewarded with opportunity? If you choose only to mine directly or buy directly, you are rewarded with the results of increasing buy pressure from the cloudmining venture. Nothing stops anyone investing in Cloudmining so that they could enjoy the benefit. And the negative comments  regarding the cloudmining were uncalled for. Cloudmining to convert btc to dmd is a great piece of forward thinking.

I don't mind the idea of decentralising the process, but the link to cloudmining was awesome. It is only a parasitic mindset that denies the right to benefit for those with increased support to DMD while reaping the associated benefits.
Mine or buy, then sit and wait for others to earn your future? I also object to people complaining about the DMD management managing the future of DMD. This is their role and they are committed.

To those who didn't like the Reactor setup, but supported management in making the decision, full kudos.

I trust our leadership is making the right decision shelving the reactor so as to pursue better outcomes with other opportunities.

Regards

 chilo

[/quote]

Let's be honest.  cloudmining BTC to buy DMD to boost the value of DMD is creating an artificial economy for DMD.  Yes, this is good for anyone who holds DMD.  But I am pretty sure if we were in a regulated market this will be illegal.   Then to argue that those who support cloudminging because it works this way deserves a bigger reward is ridiculous.  ANYONE who mines, buys and holds their DMDs is assisting in creating value for DMDs.  If the miners unload all their DMDs, the value will drop significantly and cloudmining cannot stop that.  This scheme only works because volume is so low.  I am not against cloudmining.  It has clearly resulted in a higher value for DMDs but investors in cloudmining are getting their reward from blocks found.  Creating an incentive for others to invest in cloudmining using the currency itself is wrong.  It surprises me that some people don't see this.

I think any mechanism you set up should not favor any one DMD investor over another.  That seems to be completely contradictory to the principals of cryptocoining.  If the owners of the cloudmining service want to pay the reward out of their own pockets, that's up to them, but to create a facility to do it within the mechanics of the coin is unethical.  Its a conflict of interest because those running cloudmining also run DMD.  I read comments where people say, "I trust so-and-so".  I we were talking about a stock, a commodity or US dollars on a regulated exchange, would you make that same statement?  Do you think people trusted the operators of Mt. Gox?   Its not about trust.  Its about running this currency like professionals in an above board, unquestioned way.  Outside investors and commerce partners need to see this if we want them to work with us.

I know they people running DMD have tried to drive this coin into commerce but no one is going to exchange a product or service for a currency that has no controls, no operating principals and no stability.  At the end of the day its about putting food on the table which means its about money.  We should always operate as if we are a well regulated issuers of a currency.

Personally, I don't care either way.  I invest my time and resources into mining DMD with the intent of recouping my investment and hopefully making a profit.  But I have no delusions about DMD.  In about 6 months the reward will drop to .1 and I have no idea what the difficulty will rise to before then.  From a profitability perspective mining will be so far underwater for GPU miners it would be insane to mine this coin.  Perhaps ASICs can save them but that would involved yet another financial investment.  

A couple of things on the reactor project that I don't understand from the people that seemed to take issue with it. 

From all your statements and posts. 
Everyone seemed to complain how it wasn't fair. 
Correct me if I am batsh*t crazy, but cloudmining is open and available to EVERYONE. 
Those that took the risk are the ones that the community are happily letting create part of the DMD stabilization mechanism. Yet if they are given more of an opportunity the community is outraged?   WHY?  The individuals of cloudmining took the risk/reward opportunity that was community wide!
One could easily invest the cost of 1 gpu or less and have cloudmining for the future.  Yet I see the ones that stomped their feet and cried foul the loudest are not part of cloudmining and don't have the 1500 DMD to risk.   I mine DMD everyday 24/7, I am rewarded with fresh minted coins.
I chose to invest in Cloudmining and I receive coins everyday. 
The reactor, I would invest and risk 1500 DMD for 280 days to have 4500 at the end. An opportunity,  I could also have nothing by the end if the wallet was compromised.
The first round was open to cloudmining investors....   Is that the sticking point?  How does a dev team prevent giving a resource of generating more coins out of insta dump miners that destroy price.  Look at every coin on cryptsy.  They are all rushing toward 0. LTC? DRK....

Every investment involves some sort of risk.   There is a needed payoff for the risk taken. 
I don't see what the heartburn is about the reactor.   Please give me a sound, well thought out response on this.  Not some lame it isn't fair or centralizes the network BS. 

+1 - Chilo - you are well spoken/written.  I couldn't agree more.

Well said chilo. The reasoning behind the Reactor is still sound and presents alternative if our other attempts fail, which I hope won't (together with the team will do our best to deliver).
It wasn't light decision to take especially after the amount of coding that went at the back end to integrate everything.

However, it would be great to see those suddenly active community members, who voiced their concerns about the Reactor so strongly and had programming knowledge, to really show their support when the time comes, and translate talk into meaningful action.

Hi people,

I strongly disagree with this type of sentiment, and believe the best part of reactor was the link to cloudmining. Why should those people who support buy pressure on DMD not be rewarded with opportunity? If you choose only to mine directly or buy directly, you are rewarded with the results of increasing buy pressure from the cloudmining venture. Nothing stops anyone investing in Cloudmining so that they could enjoy the benefit. And the negative comments  regarding the cloudmining were uncalled for. Cloudmining to convert btc to dmd is a great piece of forward thinking.

I don't mind the idea of decentralising the process, but the link to cloudmining was awesome. It is only a parasitic mindset that denies the right to benefit for those with increased support to DMD while reaping the associated benefits.
Mine or buy, then sit and wait for others to earn your future? I also object to people complaining about the DMD management managing the future of DMD. This is their role and they are committed.

To those who didn't like the Reactor setup, but supported management in making the decision, full kudos.

I trust our leadership is making the right decision shelving the reactor so as to pursue better outcomes with other opportunities.

Regards

 chilo

You are right cryptonit. In the end it still is a one sided conversion business strategy, it removes any responsibility from the seller, which is not a good strategy for building trust.

Pretty much unavoidable if u are mint mode 24/7 and the compounding effect is a bit more reward  I take advantage of every little bit I can gain  Why wait for 30 days for small piles to group
How else does a small time miner with a single 7950 and single 280x manage 1675+ coins in a bit over a year And I forgot a month downtime waiting for a power supply RMA ...
Only fiat input was $100 cloudmining Dec 30 2014 and reward is steadily dropping there

we use usd to compare all values and generate statistics

we dont say BTC or DMD is $

fact is if u keep coins in one wallet address u need to do nothing

DMD pos code will merge ur coins together by itself

once they over 30 days old and can try to group stake with other small pile over 30 days age

in fact all people say there is to less pos blocks they cant mint

but the truths is the opposite

as long as coins still successfull POS without beeing older than 30 days (and thats the only way how split stake can happen)

as long as this happens we see that to less coin pile compete for POS and to many coins able to mint below 30 days coin-age

the way u suggest to manual merge pile an make ur coin mint below 30 days age dont give u more pos rewards just manual work

and if lot people do it that way is the reason why not enough coin pile compete for pos blocks and people still mint below 30  days age

I understand why you are doing it in that way. In my opinion it is wrong to take BTC and say it's USD, because it is not. I think you should take BTC as BTC and USD as USD, a circumvention of that is problematic in my opinion. That's why I am not invested yet and I know for sure I am not the only one.

mail me details so i can send it back

[email protected]

Thx Cryptonit for having that handy, I can never remember where it is ... So if you are a 24/7 minter it is best to keep >= 100 DMD piles, the larger they are the less often u need to merge them ...

perhaps if u actually read thread a bit more carefully and not take out of context