Topic: [ANN] [MARKS] Incentivize Content Creators & Build a Reputation Value Framework - page 14. (Read 32570 times)

Is this a new project? What are your key features compared to other wallets that may appeal to users? Your wallet is a new version so I think it needs to be improved, and you already have the person in charge of this part yet? You should improve the wallet so that users can use the best way

In my opinion, thanks to projects that allow the use of gestures and social investment of digital to create, establish and build the value of a currency in a way that is simply not possible before the advent of the mark, Bitmark supply level funding mechanisms to finance new products and services to be community rated.

There are a lot of parameters and unknowns in this project. The thing is that the competition is huge and every plan has to go that extra mile to get investors and after that, users...So, the less unknowns, the better the project! Good luck, team!

The project has just started its business development. Already I see activity! I liked the idea of your idea. I will follow the development of the platform in the future!

Great devs, great community, and a chance to have a slice of a massive global industry? Yes, please. Wish the developers only good luck and success!

     Bitmark is a Proof-of-Work (PoW) coin, started as single Scrypt PoW when introduced in 2014, and now has eight PoW algos, a very succesful evolution to 8mPoW, governed by an effective difficulty algo, Dark Gravity Wave v3, DGWv3 and, with an emission control policy dubbed "Coin Emission Modulation", in its first version, CEMv0.1
     All algos have the Auxiliary chain Proof-of-Work submission (AuxPoW) feature: they are "merge-mineable".    Bitmark was probably the first coin to offer as many, 8 PoW algos and all merge-mineable.

     But, there have been calls for some algos to go back to native-only, and for the distinction between the production cost of merge-mined blocks and native-mined blocks be taken into account in general.
@onelineproof coded most of our vision for the current v0.9.7.2, and it is certainly a very solid, secure blockchain, flowing well, producing blocks regularly and promptly

     That said, I thinks we can add some natural improvements. With the drive to keep building on our success, for example, CEM v0.1 which has been well received in general, can be improved.  Let's give it authority over a larger part of the epoch base reward; it's warranted. CEM v0.2 will act on 80% of the epoch base block reward, instead of on 50%. The lookback time window has been softened a bit: instead of "remembering" back a whole year, we only look back 3 months, because it seems rather harsh to punish loyal miners for hashrate peaks that happened more than 3 months ago. This  will have the effect of restoring full emission that much quicker after a high hashrate event, while still deploying the "CEM Effect" for a substantial amount of time.

For the Road Map:
     I propose an additional, 9th PoW algo, Groestl (or Grøstl) as a native-only algo, and also revert Argon2d and Yescrypt to native-mined only. This would make the individual algos' target block time 18 minutes (for a combined production of a block every 2 minutes) . Code for this is taking shape in the 0.9.9 branch of the project-bitmark github repo.
     This would mean 2/3 of the algos are merge-mineable, and 1/3 are native-mined only. This will have the effect (that @onelineproof should like) of keeping to a larger emission and making it so that (I like this ...) it goes to miners who prize them a bit more, as they are the mainline, and not merely a bonus.
As I've argued in previous posts (and been pilloried by @one lineproof) I do believe that merge-mined blocks should be rewarded at a lower fraction than native mined blocks: currently Fork#2 v0.9.8.3, will map native CEM to the range 10% - > 20% for merge-mined block rewards. But I am open to reasoned arguments and discussions about what fraction of the CEM-modulated full epoch block reward merge-miners should receive and any other aspects.


Dev Time Frames : we will release 0.9.8.3 today. Bitmark v0.9.8.2 only has a small change, but it's an important and a forking change affecting consensus rules. We have run testnet4 and are satisfied.

Our dev team is picking up the slack and continues advancing. The Bitmark project is getting code contributions and moving forward with development and the next version,  v0.9.9  You can help by taking a look at the code, compiling and playing with it.  Do have fun and give us some feedback !

It seems to me this it a plan with clear defined roadmap and whitepaper. to be honest with you nowdays I rarely see such solid plans. just my opinion...

Can you tell me how long it will take to finish after the update starts?

Yes, this is solely due to the fact that we informed Cryptopia of the update to 0.9.8.3 (which should be released here shortly, I think within the next week or so).

- Quick Note: We simply wanted to do a better job of announcing the update this time around.

No Stacking has been implemented within the current system nor the upcoming 0.9.8.3 update.

Short answer:  Bitmark is AuxPoW (not PoS). 

Wallet disabled

Can you explain about the staking a bit.Will wallet be out before the end of the ICO for the desktop or will we be able to stake on mobile devices also?

Yes, Without a doubt...we should see a persistent increase in volume, once we stabilize a bit more and transition into the most sought after phase of development (Marking & Implementation, then scaling).

So, I (WE) have, and always will, persuade users to do their own research. This is not investment advice, and honestly we have been around long enough for users to gain substantive insight on the project.

volume of MARKS on Cryptopia is down, will it improve?

The senseless, unsubstantiated statements. The FUD in full regalia.  Oh well ... ¿ qu'est ce qu'on va faire ?  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯