Topic: [ANN] Halcyon v1.1.0.2 ~ NeoScrypt PoW and up to 100% PoS - page 16. (Read 73219 times)

I'm getting together a list of suggestions for the next wallet release. What would you like to get improved?

redistribution

Wow, price is tanking. Thanks for the cheap coins!

The way people trade alts not is by setting low buys in markets where the sheep haven't checked yet because volume is relatively low all around. Accum. and once the numbers are right then the price flys. As long as we're still active and support ghost then it will happen. Ive been saying it our market is primed right now because we have low total supply and people have been dumping decent amounts of coins into someones pockets at these low prices.

3 community members have donated 21K HAL towards the development this year. I appreciate your contribution, thank you very much.

Dude, I had maybe 10% when the previous dev left and about 20% now thru staking and occasional buying. I said it earlier that I'm not the largest HAL whale, but you stick to this 70% bullshit. I could also write my bag off a long time ago, but I'll better give it a spin because it's still a good coin speaking technically. The fact you didn't make a single contribution to HAL after the takeover tells the real story. You are here to make rants rather than help.

I knew and so posted, that you would not do it. OK by me. your 70% is worth absolutely nothing, no matter what you give to the dev, no matter if you put bells and a huge ribbon in it. Value: a big, fat ZERO.

On the other hand, I guarantee you that, without anything else -and there would be a lot to talk about in terms of ideas and projects-, if you give away over 2/3s of what you own, the rest, still above 20% of all HAL, will be worth SOMETHING. Something significant. Guaranteed. In any case, not much cost in putting it to a test, is there? If you are right and I am wrong, you still will have nothing in value, the same big, fat ZERO. If, on the other hand, I am right -and I know I am-, your 20% would be worth a very significant amount of money. That is with the dev not doing nothing. If the dev receives, as logically he will, the corresponding part of those 2/3s you give away, he will also make money and would be considerably more interested than he can possibly be now.

Please don't take this as intent on my part to convince you. I know better. By experience. Greed, in itself, is blind and quite stupid. In all cases. I gave you a clear exaMPLE OF A COIN DESTROYED BY THE GREED OF FAYOLING,  a great project once still tainted by him. He sunk SEED, precisely for the same situation we have here and let me tell you he was more than motivated to make it successful. And he can code. And has collaborators who bring features of all kinds to the table -even clumsy trading bots-. So I know you wont do it and will have this ultimately completely dead, as it is already, therefore not trying to convoince you of anything.

For added information, I don't even look at the price of this any longer for I know it isn't true for if you were trying to sell any amount you wouldn't get even the 1,000 sat. I wrote it out as a total loss long time ago. I just remember that, when I first invested in this project, it was a very promising one and was able, and lucky enough, to get out on time, without much damage for the most part, so why would I be interested in HAL -or anyone, for that matter-, when the value of this is nil and we could invest, donate of otherwise engage on other promoting activities, in dozens of other projects with fair distribution and not one individual holding 80% of it? It would be absurd, wouldn't it?

Almost as absurd as donating EVEN is Vitalik were to take in this coin as active, lead developer. Halcyon is very much dead, and you, dear boy, are the only remaining reason for it.

It would. Current "moneysupply" : 2336535

Buy orders on cryptsy are now for a total amount of 1193511.026 and 0.17341139 btc.

If you put a 10 btc buy order at 100 sats it would create a floor price of 100 satoshi and a exit point for every hal. It would actually be enough with a 2,29 btc buy order. And the total value of hal would increase to 2,41 btc.


Edit: One more observation. There is very little hal for sale. Up to 3795 satoshi (the 100 visible sell orders at cryptsy)  there is only 34410 coins for sale for a total of 0.495 btc. So 0.495 btc would actually bring the price up 732%.

Moving coins from one wallet to another never boosts any value. There are many things which can improve this coin and giving away large amounts of coins isn't one of them. Those who get them will dump immediately without giving it a second thought. OTOH if every holder donates a share of his holdings or its value in BTC to the dev, it will motivate him very much in making HAL a success. Something tells me it won't happen. Talks are cheap. Barabbas, how much did you donate towards the development? Maybe contributed in other sizeable ways personally? Nothing, right?

The only thing that would boost the value of HAL, immediately, would be you reducing your holdings to 20% max. and distributing the rest to all the rest of the wallets having 1,000 HAL or more. Noting else will save this coin.

I know, like fayoling, you will not do it, so look at the future revisiting what happened to SeedCoin.

BTW thanks to those who dumped today thru my buy orders. I donated your 10k HAL straight to the dev.

TXID 1f8dbf4a09c7d00e3dfc7efff778c957b0fc8847c0892d518ddf724840c783d8

I don't think any single person owns 70% or even 50% of HAL. In addition, I'm not the largest whale here most likely. Why am I supposed to sell cheap now if I bought my coins high before the previous dev fucked up? I didn't instamine anything.



So if I put a 10 BTC buy order at 100 sats or even lower, it will boost the real value of HAL? You gotta be kidding me.

I agree in everything you say, but a higher pos % would not really change much. A higher pos % would lead to more coins on the exchange and in the long run a better distribution. But if phantom owns more then 50% of the supply, this coin is doomed to fail no matter what, unless he spread  the "wealth" and reduces his holdings. Selling cheap (sell walls at market price), giving awy bounties etc.

Halcyons market cap is now $4908. But the real value of halcyon is much lower and equal to the combined buy orders. Halcyons true value is at this time is 0,3325 btc, or $93,1.

One more point when you talk about unfair distributions. One of the worst distributed coins ever, dashcoin, is nr. 4 on coinmarketcap. Dashcoin was extremly instamined, and right after the instamine the block rewards and total coins was reduced dramatically. They have even changed the name of the coin 3 times and people still buy into that scam. Everything is apparantly possible.  

We may have a communication problem because I don't understand you either and what I do understand, doesn't make sense, to me, at all. Lets see: Phantom owns at least 70% of the total coins currently in circulation -I'm sure quite a bit more than that since he stated that a long time ago and he for sure has been staking tens of thousands of coins-. Who do you think stakes -and would stake- the vast majority of coins if your suggestion was to be accepted? See, the ONLY reason why not a single coin that is overtaken by a community has been or will ever be successful, is that the only reason for the "take over" y to try and protect the interests of those bagholders who own the majority of the coin. So, in fact, every attempted "revival" of a coin is, in fact, the launching of a new coin... only with massive pre-mine. Except that that pre-mine is called "big bagholders" but it amounts to the same thing. A project without more or less KNOWN fair distribution, cannot possibly be actually successful -the incredible NEXT being the exception, and only partially so since, given the qualities and potential of the project, it should be worth 10 times more, at least, that its current market cap and the only thing impeding it is that "distribution problem" that it has.

No one with a minimum common sense will ever buy this coin, no matter how big or small the staking or the mining. With only a 10% of his holdings, Phantom could manipulate it to have a price near zero, imagine if it would reach a decent enough price, what he could do at will with it. People has learned no not put any money in project where they could lose it all at the whim of one of a few owners. That's why take-overs are never successful. And that's why this project, otherwise technically as viable as many other with a much higher market cap, will continue going to the ground inevitably.

There is no minimum. However smaller inputs are more likely to get stuck without staking due to a 7.5 day age limit.



The reward rate will decrease to 100% as scheduled by block #420K which comes in 5 months or so. It will stay at this nominal rate forever. The actual reward may be lower depending on difficulty and luck. It's a fair play.

I really don't understand what you are trying to say. The inflation % (in a POS only coin) dont really matter. If it is 2%, 36% or 200% and you own 1% of the supply, you will have that same 1% of the supply as long as you help secure the network.

If the coin was to become a common means of exchange, it would have been optimal with a fixed price pegged to a fiat currency, and the inflation would then have to be the same as the fiat currency. But on the other hand, bitcoin is a great mean of exchange without a pegged price thanks to the payment processors.

I don't know what you define as a scam. I look at most coins as pure scams. But changing the pos percentage would not make this any more or any less of a scam, since it would not benefit some on the cost of others. All would keep their share, and that share would not change no matter what the pos percentage is.

The goal should be to improve the hashrate, both pos and pow, to improve the security of the blockchain. Higher demand for the coin and higher price, whatever comes first, would achive that.

I can't agree. More coins just means lower value.
Look at PHS. 50% POS, valuable and enduring.
With it's fundamentals, this coin should be worth a lot more than it is. Something like ORB. I've bought a bunch of HAL and I'm sure it will reward me. All it needs is some advertising. And maybe change the OP to "up to 200%".
Coins that tend to survive are honest, stable, and have dedicated devs and communities. Changing protocol willy-nilly will only chase away serious investors. JMHO.

And wouldn't that be a scam, in fact? Because if you go for what is popular -but unsustainable-, that's the anatomy of a scam, isn't it? Any and all treatments in economy that I have read, point out to the fact that any currency, crypto or otherwise, with a rate of inflation beyond 2-3% is actually  non viable. The whole crypto movement is, in big part, an answer to the depreciation of FIAT which has lost 96% of it's value in the last 100 or so years. And it's average of inflation has been quite low, in fact (that's why it has taken so long to lose value).

So yes, high (or hyper, as they are called) POS coins are popular right now. But they are all scams. All. Non-viable vehicles created with the sole purpose of getting money from the greedy "investors" blinded by the high staking... while the right people dump on them "responsibly" (what a term, ah?). Is that what you want this project to be? At this stage, it may very well be a scam worth trying to make some money out of an investment obviously gone bad, but "we" don't want to be scammers outright, do we?

I thought a bit more about the real POS rate.

Total coin supply is now: 2.330.801

Maximum POS coins created in 1 year: 1.051.200
(60/2,5)*24*365*5=

Potential maximum pos % : 45,1%

But the average pos block reward is less then 5 coins and this brings the true pos rate even lower. If we do the same calculation with an avarage block reward of 4 coins instead of 5 ( this is probably more accurate), the yearly POS is only 36%.

To sum up:

It is really misleading to call this a coin with 200% pos when the actual pos return is around 36%. Of course, if you catch a block below 5 coins and you do this every time, you will get 200%, but that is not possible. On the other hand. Many people don't mint at all, so the actual POS rate for those who actually mint is much higher then 36%.

I would vote for a block size increase to meet the average pos reward of 200%. High pos coins are really popular now, and the coin supply is low. This would bring more interest and higher coins supply at the exchange.

I split the coins in blocks of 200. When they stake, sometimes they get split into two blocks of 102,5 (or 101,6486168 if it dont hit stake cap).  But sometimes they don't split and i get blocks of 205 coins. Why is this?

Is 100 the optimal block size now as griffen1102 suggest?

Blocks around 100 never splits btw.