@cryptohunter
the problem is here, that we have not acted or reacted to what the market wants for 6 months and the price is falling off of a cliff. Time is a real concern here.
I agree that too much time has passed undone (especially since some people simply talked problems away) but this doesn´t change that we need to weigh up advantages and disadvantages in the present and should at no cost rush into any solution in my opinion.
2. half the qrk holders will not use their qrk to buy coins with POS and anon features. They seem to highly object to them being added to qrk anyway.
On what base do you make this statement?
3. we could release this coin in batches and control the amount of QRKs that can be used to pay for the new coin.
4. the foundation will control the qrk that was used to buy the new coin they will not dump it on the market like those leaving qrk for other coins.
Even if the foundation would control the Quarks and hold them back from market people will ask themselves if they should rather stick with quark or the other coin and why the hell there is a second coin. From the perspective of an observer this is confusing and as long as there is no obvious good reason why there are two coins it doesn´t sound sustainable to me.
Are you part of the QRK foundation already?
I received a foundational mail address because I was contacting possible external partners, so I would consider myself to be associated to the foundation. I always rejected to become part of the foundation as long as it has no democratic and transparent structure. However, I am working closely with the people and I can tell you that everyone is working hard to find a solution. I think the problem that makes it take so long is a lack of institutionalization. The foundation needs a real structure and things will become more effective and less time consuming. However, this is tough work and all of us have normal life, work & freetime. This is why I am pushing for public discussions. We should do this together and exchange opinions publicly.
@reRaise
I don´t know to whom DI refers when he says "we". I know he had his own plans - if the Foundation would have agreed on something like this I would know and it is no t the case.
Hi there,
Been away for a couple of days... although great to return and see some discussion going on.
1. - Yes - not rush but must act within a reasonable time frame.
2. - Basing this statement on what people have said in the thread ( so has small power statistically speaking) but i see a lot anti POS/anon - basically any kind of new features.
3. - The clear reason for the 2nd coin would be - more features, POS, Anon and anything else to catch rides on hype trains (never ignore hype) it brings qrk new members of the community and new BTC.
I would keep some of my qrks and not switch them over because yes mainstream application is likely to look more towards coins that are open and are not anon. Who knows maybe pos has flaws etc , there are many reasons i would still hold my qrks. Also all new services created by the qrk pot and new companion coin pot can accept qrk too.
4.- I am glad you're part of the foundation. I like active members. I like people that want to have open discussions on things before implementation.
Again i can only stress that i see Zero negatives for the companion coin. It is no more competition that the other 400 coins out there, it will bring many advantages.
This time though we need to ensure a very active development team, community manager/s, marketing teams and project managers. All should be rewarded for completed tasks upon completion. No more expecting people to work for free. They need to be fully invested and committed to qrk and the new companion coin. QRK has started to die because it is competing against teams that have full funding and have more resources and motivation.
Max made a great coin, but i watched nothing be done until it sank to 21 sats. This will happen again. He did not premine nor instamine and to be honest i would not even like to say he has any qrk remaining. He is probably a very high level coder and has a great job. QRK was quite possibly a fun project not something he wants to dedicate his life to.
First thing we need is some new leadership. A set out structure of the foundation so we know who is who, and how committed they are.
Next we need to action some of these plans. I see no difference between coin swapping/burning than the ipo is QRK? this is the same thing except they are going to destroy the qrk? This is kind of a trust based idea again. How to we know the keys are destroyed? I don't like the idea and also there is no reason to destroy it. The fact it will be taken off the market and held by the foundation in a transparent address is enough to see that is taken off of the market and only released as and when the community thinks it is a good time. I could be years of funds for projects and services to bring on teams that are committed to qrk.
You will see as these qrks are taken out of the market qrk along with new planned development for qrk and its companion coin the price of qrk will rocket. There are not many qrks being sold but there are zero buyers. Bring in some reason to buy and you will see a very sharp reversal.
However time is critical. We need to get going now while we have some purchasing power behind us.
May be we make it that you can only buy so many of the new companion coin at one time..... then based on activity and qrk dedication you can buy more. There are lots of interesting things we can do here. First the leadership, 2nd the coders. I mean without some high level coders behind us there is no point discussing it. However if i was a coder and was told there will be a 10% development pot + the large QRK pot to use up over the next years + an established community + a ton of real investors that can be reached by bill once we have some rock solid investments for them. QRK is still in a great position and if i were a coder i would be very keen to put myself forward for this.
Probably same with transactions.
