Arcanin you and the rest shouldn't hide behind "the coin we're forking has this bug in the main tree since april 16, 2014"
In their defence, John Doe isn't likely to be running Ubuntu or Gentoo so doubt he'll be seeing bugs like this ;-) Not to mention they found it during Beta and seem to have fixed it in a number of hours.....
I would however agree that the transaction fees stuff needs a better explanation for the layman.
> It doesn't really matter if a bug only applies to a minority, if you plan to serve millions of normal users (and this is what they do). Even small percentages are big numbers. IMO, you need rock-solid software and I'm not sure if the testing is widespread enough.
> I don't know about the explanation, it would need to be hidden entirely IMO - John Doe wants fixed rates.
But the root of the problem is the USP which was "very easy to use coin for everyone". Currently we see a web based wallet (looks nice, but has hardly any features) and is a late-comer among dozens of established bitcoin (and other) web-wallets which look just as nice.
The local wallet is the same "complicated" (not my word) bitcoin wallet we have been using for years. I was expecting some massive evolution there (at least UI wise), since Neucon clearly states "For a regular consumer, [Bitcoin] is still hard to understand, difficult to obtain and complicated to use". Again the current state, means a late entrant position with no unique feature.
Now I would ask myself why is this coin easier to use than bitcoin/any other coin?
How could investors be satisfied after they expected some beautiful grandma-friendly wallets at launch day (after 1.5 years of development)?
(This is not to offend you Arcanin - I really appreciate you
showing balls taking this seriously unlike the thread starters et al.)