Topic: [ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade - page 115. (Read 1031025 times)

ha ha i don't doubt we ceratinly feel the same way on that issue the Dev an i that is : D

Maybe he was so compelled to because NXT is such an obvious scam ha ha

All very interesting while you guys were spending all that energy trolling here - I was helping get Quark integrated with FrozenBit:


frozenbit.io/

A fully integrated Multi sig wallet that will give Quark investors access to :

- Two factor auth

- an iOS wallet

- an Android wallet

- Live security in real time

and much more.

also I look forward to hearing from the community about Max's response from that email that was just sent in which he basically (common sense)

said that anyone can create any crypto and the market will judge it, also has the ability to Merge mine , also i can confirm the frustrating lack of communication sometimes.

but Max is the best dev in Crypto (certainly one of)

i don't doubt that he could have coded the original Bitcoin protocol.

------------------------------

What do you mean i just said i was mining from the start? the fact we decided to keep mining for a longer period since we like the currency and the servers were cheap has no bearing on the scam you are trying to highlight.  We wanted more coins we decided to just leave the servers running. I don't have the 33M wallet though so it has nothing to do with the point you are bringing up.

I don't really like one person having 10% of the minting, but if they bought or mined it fairly then that's just how it is.

Let's not get distracted  from the issue you have brought to attention here.

Who cares about the dumping if it was on exchange? means nothing to me if they mined it fairly. Perhaps it was steve lamb that guy is sharp and i would guess a multi millionaire.

I want to know about the scam how some wallet got 33M without mining fairly against anyone else who mined at the time or bough unfairly against anyone that bought at the time.

The rest does not matter.

If the short POW makes it a scam, then what about every single new coin released some of which have a POW period of hours.?


Let's focus on one issue at a time. The 33M wallet. Is it a scam or not?

I see no possible way there is a scam there.

Let's get passed this now if there is a proof of scam let's deal with it, if there is no scam let's get back to the POB or QRK only ipo companion coin, or any other great new idea to bring qrk back into the running as an active coin community with some planned features/services to attract back some of the lost market share.

CH and Thule,

IT is good to hear from someone who was actually there since the beginning, @CH as most of us present members were not...

From what I have heard the hugest remaining wallets are likely from exchanges, as BTC38 came forward recently(past few months) with their wallet address

I agree with CH that Thule, you need to come forward with some PROOF of your claims--We are open to see proof only. Additionally I have p.m.'d you about this issue, as you keep saying the same things over and over..We actually have someone who is willing to help investigate your claims if you can present some evidence--Further I suggest that a separate thread be started specifically for this if there is evidence, so it can all be worked through...

And FINALLY, last but not least..We are going to be having a meeting with Max himself-time to be announced....
 If you are willing to participate in a civilized discussion, you are welcome to attend.. Civilized meaning, asking questions in a normal rational manner, rather than throwing accusations around with no evidence.
This is the best way to get to the bottom of this- You might just be the key to this if you have something substantial to bring forward...

Thanks for your reply!

P.S. I type in blue so I can keep track of where I am on the page mostly, lol- If this annoys anyone, I will stop

who were dumping each night hundreds of k coins ?


this makes not much sense as over 90% of this coin was already harvested in the first month.So why would somebody buy servers for months when most coins were already mined ?


And i never claimed that it was a premine scam.Many people call it so as there was a scam during the mining in the first month which leads to the same result like a premine scam

The POB coin can and will have major success if handled correctly and tranparently.

What exactly are you claiming about these large wallets? Be precise and back up these claims with hard evidence. Do not say things that can't be proven else you will lose all credibility and will just be ignored in future.

I am trying to understand what angle you have here.

I was here at the launch and i know for a fact there was no premine, there was an instamine of sorts by steve lamb, who i affectionately named the coin rapist because of his instamining super powers with huge processing power. He did this on many coins.

However, the dev took very few coins and the rest of us just made do with mining on our rigs like the vast majority.

I can not say how many exactly steve took but if you look at his screen shot i guess he got a LOT of coins at the start.

Please tell us exactly who you think this wallet is holding 33M and how they attained those coins?  Bring evidence or at least credible reasoning with you not baseless accusations.


If you can PROVE some kind of scam here i am open to hearing about it and i am sure others are too.

I don't see how there can be one though, since the only way to get coins was to mine them, if you wanted to buy them from another miner it is down to them to decide the price.

MAX never got many coins, from the start he never really did any promotion of the coin and it was soon all dumped on cryptsy for next to nothing. The wallet with 33M or any wallet would have had to buy them or mine them. There is no scam that i can see could have happened.

If there is a scam please outline right now how it took place and the motivation of the huge wallet to accrue 10% of the minting only to let the coin sink to a very low value, this is a terrible scam if it ever was one.




NEXT


The POB coin if handled correctly could do a lot of great things for qrk. This is a seperate issue to the 33M wallet. Just because we have not turned attention to this 33M wallet yet does not follow POB will have no long term success.

We need funding to aid development of features and services. This is the bottom line.
However the POB coin can be also used to filter out these whales you don't like. The rate of POB could be limited according to your activity or any multiple other ways of getting fat cats involved or left unable to burn.


There are multiple possible advantages that have been covered to death and yet NO credible disadvantage above and beyond any other of the 5 new coins released per day now.

I like POB. i like qrk only IPO. Both give qrk holders a transfer of share into the new coin if they choose. It allows new features and experimentation without altering the qrk core. It allows us to attract new blood with new btc, it gives an indication qrk is not dead, the development pot is the most important part and that if handled correctly and efficiently can take qrk back into being one of the main players today.

Those saying the real work has no call for privacy are wrong. I was totally anti privacy at the start but i can see now that it is very desirable, anyone watching the markets and saying nobody cares about anon features are not being realistic. BTC is a terrible example people always quote. BTC was the first rules that apply to other coins do not essentially apply to BTC. It is not playing in the alt domain. Also BTC has taken the mainstream route, it would not be good for BTC to have anon features in my opinion..  The best part is QRK can stay fully transparent and aimed at more mainstream business but we will attract also the BTC of those wanting anon and other features we are not sure we want to see in qrk itself.

Thule explain the qrk scam in specific detail. Make sure to explain how it took place and why. I am interested in how you believe one wallet got control of 10% of the minting without mining or buying it. To me it seems impossible. However, if you can show me how it happened and it was not via mining or buying then YES perhaps we will think of a way to rectify this situation.

Let me say though that i was mining at the start along with a few others i know on only our home machines and over the next months mined fairly over 2M quark, we did hire a couple of cheap servers with dual core xeons that were like 80 bucks each a month.

So even if they mined them all i see that could have been quite possible for any one other than a bunch of noobs with a few rigs at home.  That is only 15x what we mined.

QRK was very fair to those that chose to mine it, as the price sunk less people mined and moved to mining other coins.

Anyway, i will await your detailed explanation of this 33M wallet issue that you are upset about.  I think though you will find they either bought or mined it fairly on closer scrutiny.

If you can not prove the 33m and other whale wallets attained these coins in a way that was unfair i hope you will please move on to other parts of the discussion here.

So you just read the thread instead of auditing the blockchain.Thats the exect professionalism i'm talking about.


Quark based on claims instead of facts

Thete is no PoB coin. This is nothing but one idea  to cope with the current situation.  Take a coffee and read the thread.

can someone sum up what is happening with QRK & this new POB coin?

@Thule

I know and read the auditing thread and I recommend everyone to read it as people know afterwards how to treat your comments (in case they didn't already)

Sorry but after reading your reply i can already say this wont have any longterm success.To many bs posted



The diffrence between the smart people and the rest of the community/you is that we checked the blockchain by auditing it and can say without concern that these coins havent been bought via exchanges.
Of course there are a few bigger buyers but they make arround 5% out of 100% and would never ever explain the big wallets.
You are like Kolin trying to sell the smart part of the community for stupid if you think they are going to belive you that these wallets are from exchanges (after the audit).

You dont change/fix any major issue.You didnt learn anything out of the past or have a clue why the community left the coin.

I would recommend to study a bit more about the history why this community went down and maybe focus on fixing the community.


Haha what a joke.Seems like high educated ex members were stupid to audit the bc correctly

Just proofs again you know nothing about quark.
There was already proof posted which you can also see on bitcointalk if you look for it.Of course you the new leading part have no clue about it.WOW what a great new leadership.No changes from the old coin

You guys still didnt learn anything.
You studied macro economics ?Sorry but you dont even understand what these big wallets mean for a "currency" .Its kills instantly the main idea of a cryptocurrency.

But like i said at the beginning of quark in november quark was never created to get a currency but to create a ponzi which wont change with your idea

Strange? Please read this thread. People are claiming that the dev left Quark which is simply untrue and I won't blow into this horn only because I don't believe that the communication behavior of Max is sustainable in any way. If you didn't understand by now what I meant when I said that I don't believe inthe development of Quark: this is what I meant. And no, I don't see the development problem would be solved by the new forum. When I had the idea it was mainly about creating an environment that a) would provide incentives to participate by rewarding networking activity and b) would serve as open place for a democratic foundation (btw a project I've been up to for months).
You seem to blame the fact that planning hasbeen done secretly on boards like Trello. Another wrong interpretation I have to debunk: i could look up the dozens of times that only I have called for others to become involved and help out. This was never closed to the community. Some parts where simply not for the eyes of people outside the Quark community. I don't remember one case where access has been denied. There was no reason for it as we were thankful for every helping hand. The forum is certainly a better place for communication and yes that is one reason why we brought it forward.

And let me be clear on one point that you may not be aware of since you just joined the community few weeks ago: me and many others put a lot of work and time into this project, so I have a high interest that this isn't lost and like other people I will look for measures to save this work, however as a consequence of the latest development I will do that as transparent as possible. That has nothing to do with being impatient. I hope you understand that.

@quarkfx glad that you took the time to respond. I won't comment on it because its your opinion vs mine but regarding the meeting, I believe its the 10th August not 8th ?


"Max is not as silent as people say, actually he contacted us today"

Strange that after you complained so much about Max unresponsiveness and the fact that he missed the last week meeting you're now saying that he's actually not as `silent as people say`.

Max communication I believe its highly unorthodox for an open source software like Quark, to be kept in such privacy and only communicate with select few. Usually people involved in open source have public mailing lists on which other users part of that community can participate by asking, giving ideas, it keeps the damn software open source and makes people feel welcomed in that community. Maybe thats the reason Quark has fallen so much in last months, with the private trello board and private communication between select few. I believe thats why we created the new forum, to solve exactly this problem, but alas you've given up on `development of quark` whatever that means...

@Maok

Maok, I know you would prefer the community to "stick together", but you have to accept that parts of the community have no interest on working on this project under given circumstances. I will give you an overview with regard to your arguments:


Exactly, that´s the effect - for as long as it is possible to burn. The more people become interested in the coin, the more Quark is gaining value - once the burning period ends the price will correct to what the real prospect on Quark is. The people who rest with Quark will have to care for that.


Massive advantage? As far as I know had Quark a fair distribution phase, didn´t it? (otherwise it wouldn´t make sense for you to support it, would it?)  
This is about giving Quark users who lost trust in the currency to start from scratch: The new users are the old users & value = prospect. If other users want to get in, fine, they can buy Quark, but that´s their business.


Unlike forking, creating a proof of burn coin is an individual decision and it is the same individual decision for those who burn Quark as it would be if they sell off. So, I guess you see that noone has the right to claim that others don´t sell their coins - you can´t construct a responsability for people who prefer to leave that other will have losses. I personally think that they do better to leave but this is everyone´s personal decision. Again: in a free market you can´t construct responsibilities as you attempt to do.


We don´t need patience, we need a rational discussion and analysis. Part of this has been done and even if some of us will decide to create Proof-of-Burn there will be enough time to go on debating. I am willing to take part in this discussion but I will still follow this option and fathom out ways to proceed in this direction (why wouldn´t I?)


Who is the avarage Joe? Altcoins like Dogecoin helped to get Crypto more exposure to the avarage Joe and so will other Coins who manage to be sufficiently innovative. Dogecoin managed to do that with a concept that most people would call senseless. Anyway, I agree that this is not about creating a hype coin, but I disagree that all features that are not in Quark are senseless, e.g. Voting with Coins. Your point seems to be that Quark is already perfect. I disagree about that and I would disagree with every person who believes that any other coin is perfect. Things are in in a state of flux. Quarks current hashrate issue has different reasons: it is an effect of a slowly decreasing inflation rate, a decrease in prize given to speculation cycles and a lack of trust in further development - and probably other factors. So regarding your questions:


So do other currencies


So do other currencies


Optimal? Yes, a low inflation is good if you want to maintain value at slow growth, but "optimal"? I had my courses in macro economics, so I wonder on what considerations you base your statement? Fact is that there is no such as "optimal inflation" because money is a medium and mediums are object to discourse. It is possible that a slower inflation decrease could have been beneficial to Quark in the current situation and it is also possible that the current model would have more success than it has now under different circumstances. So, please, could you explain in what way Quark has an inflation pre-set that is alternative-less?


Because Quark has a hashrate issue that leads to a security issue. I agree that a merge mining coin would HELP in this situation but it wouldn´t SOLVE it. Quark would be dependent on the existence and sense of the merge mining coin(s). I guess you see that this is a substantial and not just a minor problem.


Max is not as silent as people say, actually he contacted us today and asked for a meeting. I have always hopes that things in communication get better. I even think Max will cooperate with other devs. I have my concerns that we can rely on regular correspondence.

Quark and it´s community are one and the same thing. There is no Quark without people who believe in it. Are you complaining about people having doubts?  


@Thule


No, why would they? First off, I know you are obsessed with these large wallets, but it seems you´ve never considered that this wallets could be cold storage of exchanges. This has been proved for the largest wallets. Also, I don´t see any reason why you would like to do changes on the blockchain. There is no proof whatsoever that the blockchain has been manipulated. If you have, please provide.


This is not about changing Quark, it is about a Proof of Burn coin. Read about it. It does not need any agreement of any developer. It is also not "destroying" Quark. Quark can peacefully coexist with this coin.  


First off, it is not my intention to act on hearsay, so I will skip this information. I also don´t see why it would matter if either Kolin or Max were related to Russia.


Anyway, I can´t provide more than an idea. It is up to others to follow or help to make it possible. Everyone needs to take decision based on his or her own considerations. I can only motivate everyone to do the thinking on his and her own and not easily draw conclusions - also concerning my own statements.  We will have a meeting on Sunday 8th that will hopefully bring us together and allow us to move on in mutual understanding.

Not true http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/2b9etg/from_max_gtesting_the_092_wallet_conversion/

But he should be more connected with the community

The Dev has dissapeared for a long time..What's wrong?

Another question to quarkfx



What is going to happen with the big wallets in your "burn" options .What is going to happen with the
leading wallets which have over 33.000.000 coins ?Am asking cause this was the main reason the community broke.
Are these wallets getting destroyed ?

Second question would be did you even talked with Max that he is going to give access to quark so you guys can add a new dev team to it ?Is there any plan b if he is not going to provide these details ?


Am asking cause for me as many other old members it looked like Kolin and Max are coworking and are both related with Russia.So to say the truth i doubt these 2 guys will give away the control of quark

Yes Ill remember because nothing could be further from the truth--

As I said here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8122103

Kolin, if you are going to pretend you are not the OP of Mimic, at least remember to change your login back to Digital Industry when posting on other threads about NXT!
( https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7545981)

Meantime, I am looking forward to the meeting next week to discuss REAL solutions: Finding a new Dev, fork, proof of Burn- lets decide the best options and move forward so we can get out from this cloud once and for all!!

Yep it'll do good for quark only if the big purses will burn theirs so I agree we might see a very good effect on Quark price in the market  after the burning process

As for the new PoB coin, I don't see the incentives from a new user perspective knowing that those who had Quark gained an massive advantage in the initial distribution of the new coin.

As with these sort of alt coins investments, you have to stick with a coin that respects your way of thinking and hope for the best, I am a bettor so I don't mind losing but remember I only invested few bitcoins(~4) last month on Quark so I have nothing huge to lose, but if this move proves the wrong one, there will be others who will suffer much more than that. We need patience in deciding, even though admittedly some core quarkers(like Cashmen) seated and suffered for a long time.

As for the above comment "Anonymous PoS, automatic coin mixing" features that are searched in new coins: I mean, what a piece of bollocks. These features are NOT sought in the real world, proof of that is Bitcoin which doesn't have them. These are only speculated by those who don't have any allegiance to a set of principles and only try to profit from others which are already familiar in crypto world and may believe in them. For the average Joe these concepts mean nothing and if you want to grow as a coin you need to reach average Joe with features in crypto coins that are better than fiat cash.

Yes Quark is good for the real world economy because it doesn't allow specialized miners so we can maintain a relatively equal vote, yes Quark is good because of speed of transactions, yes Quark is good because it has a optimal inflation pre-set, yes Quark was the first to introduce these conditions so why should I move to another coin ?

Dev issue, yes Max is not responding to any emails but we can try and find new dev team, lets try and start raising funds for that, if that doesn't work we'll work from there on and if Quark proves that its resilient in time it will eventually start growing. Also when the massive dumps(like 2-3 today) stop flooding the market the price will might actually start growing bit by bit. Quark is not dead, its been made dead by members of community.

What we need is to stick united in community and have a discussion next Sunday with all supporters of Quark so we decide which way to go forward and see if the majority agrees or not. We can decide to find new dev team, we can decide to fork Quark in order to implement whatever features quarkers want, we can decide to go with PoB coin, etc lets just meet and decide. Those who are interested please mark here the dates when you're available: http://doodle.com/7kddvnndc8ympgu2 and if Sunday is not the most popular we can change it, but atm most core members are only available at that time.

I contacted the dev of MC2 as I personally find the concept convincing (look up the whitepaper in the btctalk thread) and it would allow implementing PoS/PoW (with preference given to PoW) that would allow coping with a low inflation rate. Anyway, MC2 isn´t ready and will probably only be ready by the end of the year, so it is not so likely that the devs answer will be positive. Anyway he said he planned to release the concept open source and with 2 months of f/t work (his estimation) it can be implemented in Quark. To be honest I currently don´t mind skipping Quarks algorithm as long there is a decent inflation rate, a decent transaction speed and up to date precautions against ASICs.

I wrote him a long explanation of how this could be done and think it´s fair to give him 2 weeks to answer. In the meantime we can and should look out for other developers but while it is certainly crucial to find a competent developer it is also important to find convincing specs. Just redoing Quark doesn´t make sense to me.

We are currently preparing for a group chat on Sunday next week, announcement is likely to follow on Reddit soon. We should discuss different approaches there so that every position has it´s place. In the end it will be the individual decision of everyone which way to go. I already said, that I am willing to moderate the session. Any help is appreciated.