Topic: [ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade - page 144. (Read 1031025 times)

Hi Niothor,

Yes, i do see your point with regarding the difficulty of consulting every qrk holder out there. For me personally it would be enough to PM every single person on this thread, announce in the main section and give time for all qrk holders 1 month to vote and have their say on the introduction of the super block and which escrow members would hold it if it took place.


Yes again i agree, people holding 100k qrk should have more say than those holding 50qrk. It should really be 1 qrk per vote. Even then people could find away to cheat the voting system


It is impossible to do it in a perfectly fair way right now.

However, imagine you were a qrk holder and your share was diluted 10% but as a result the value of your holdings had risen 1000% vs Fiat would you be happy?

For me personally at this time as a largish qrk holder i vote to do it. Sure the planning will have to be well thought out and agreed upon. Everything perfectly executed and managed. Transparent 100%.

I know drastic changes can have ill effect. There could be criticism. However. this is not a snatch and grab for the good of a few,  this is will be a discussed and agreed upon action that will lead to many new developments/services and get the community back involved with qrk. Right now there is nothing to discuss, nothing to talk about, nothing to make decisions on, argue about, debate. There is just nothing at all. If we all can't get together, discuss and plan, then execute some projects and services that will at the very least x10 the interest in QRK then we should all just pack up and get out of this.

Let's just let QRK fizzle out since we obviously have nothing in this community except a bunch of people waiting to make money for nothing, not willing to do anything, gamble anything, donate anything, change anything or discuss anything . This action would be a gamble but a gamble taken for the good of the entire qrk community not just a few. If one of us loses we all lose. That's why we have to make sure this funding is put to maximum effect. We need to bring in some great teams that are paid out only for completed projects.

I think we need to present this idea to the community and let the debate begin. We need to pick out the pros and cons and then either go for it or not.

There is indeed no way to guarantee we would never do this again. I mean i guess it would depend how it turned out. If for example we did this and the services and projects created boosted qrk interest and uptake by 10000% by the time the qrk dev pot ran dry it would be view as an amazing success. If in future we wanted a nice development pot set up again, then it would again be up for vote. The bigger and more active you can grow this community on here and get people together the more the results of the vote have more power.

My opinion is that if was as a community (which i view to have some pretty smart people) can not take this 10% and use it to create at least a 100% gain in interest and uptake in QRK we need to quit this and join other communities that are attracting people and creating new inventive projects daily. I mean to fail we have to attract less than 10% new investment and interest in qrk. If that happened i am happy to accept we deserve to perish.

If the vote was no, then so be it. The community have spoken. I do think though a lot of people say yes or no without fully considering all possible outcomes and the level of risk and reward. To me the risk is nothing to the possible reward. We are at about 1/15th of qrks peak value, yes i know we could be back up with a few btc worth of qrk taken off of the market but still we are sinking against BTC daily. Right now we can sit here watching QRK sink or do try some things.

If I take a shit and put it in a brown paper bag, would anyone buy it?  Probably not.

If I take a shit and put it in a brown paper bag and slap an "all natural, organic, pesticide free fertilizer" label on the bag would anyone buy it?  Probably.

What quark needs is good marketing (and marketing to non-miners) and active usage.  I'm a quark holder and I can barely do diddly dick with it except trade it for other coins on an exchange.

Get exposure, let people see that quark has buying power, and the prices will rise on their own.

Anyone read this?

Any type of MAJOR change to a coin is detrimental to it's success.
Changing coin amount,block rewards and timing are too major to change.

Saying that this kind of event will never happen again is proven how?
Maybe 2-3 years down the road it seems that QRK needs another promotional push..and whoops..we did it again.
Once the rules are broken the trust is gone.

I don't know how to solve QRK's predicament but this isn't the way.

How is the community going to decide this?
One vote for quark owned? One vote for member?
How are you going to count the votes?

With a mining poll having 90% of the hashing rate (sorry i'm using old numbers , i don't know if the situation changed) how is this going to be fair.

You know why bitcoin devs don't say a word about any real changes that would imply a hardfork?
Because they know that they can't take a fair decision and can't have a real vote. This is one major flaw in cryptos.

A few can decide the faith of others...like in the actual economy. Nothing changed.

ps
Although I'm saying this and I have an avatar of a polar bear , I'm still bullish in regards to cryptos future.
But not the ones that are currently alive.

Interesting post, I'm more inclined to agree with this idea now even though niothor put forward a good arguement against it.
Could we put this project out to tender to the prospective developers, coders, marketing teams etc.  Then we could vote on their proposals of how they are the particluar ones to really move this coin forward with innovative ideas, dedication, respect of deadlines, a professional work ethic, etc...
This would help keep the coins ultimate direction in the control of the community. 

Hi, thanks for reply Niothor

I do take your point with this never ending printing devaluing a currency eventually to zero. I do agree with the points you have made. However let me just explore this avenue a little more and discuss some of the details which i believe make your example less appropriate that it may seem at first glance.


1/ I do not think we can compare QRK to a country. We should compare QRK to other crypto currencies. They are very different. The biggest difference is that QRK will only ever decide as a community to expand their minting, and indeed unless people want to expand they will not use the new fork and the extra 30M would never exist. This guarantee's that QRK can never just add another 500M without favour from the majority of QRK holders. Country governments just do this on a whim and the people really have no say with it. Crypto is really like a true democracy with how it works. Also yes sometimes when governments print money out of this air it has negative effects on the currency value but very positive long term effects on the industry and wider economy of a country. Things like this are very complex and hard to really know fit they work well or not. In QRKS case it is different because unlike when countries print money they can not be can not be sure they will get positive growth in return. However with QRK we will only release the funds AFTER we see projects and services completed that will increase the price and interest in qrk.


2/ QRKs main issue there is no clear leadership and no funding to put full time leadership in place. Other successful coins have either a developer that took a large chunk of coins via premine, instamine or gets it from tax. MAX got next to nothing. Because if you look at the start, there were the usual linux whales like lamb that grabbed it all up. I do not know who max is but he is probably a talented coder with a good job. He has not the time nor the inclination to be a full time leader since he has probably no large stake here. He mostly vanished from launch day. However he did create an amazing coin that has worked perfectly up to now.

3/ We need full time leadership, we need people with coding skill and marketing skills brought on, but since there was no premine, no instamine that went to anyone still involved with quark at the foundation there is no funds for further developement. QRK is kind of different to 99% of crypto in that a LOT of the coins held are held by people that found out about QRK through bill and have just locked their qrk in wallets dreaming of the days it will magically become worth a fortune. Most crypto (perhaps aside from BTC) is held by miners, investors that are heavily involved with crypto and active in the community. This is why QRK appears and actually is less active that in should be. We don't know how much Bills investors have locked away, but looking at the wallets that never move it is a huge amount.


Most other successful crypto currencies have a driving force behind them either the dev with lots of coins to support his development or lots of miners and investors here that help push the developments on to enhance the value of their holdings.


The 30M superblock will never happen again, indeed no superblock or extra coins can be created without the majority of qrk holders being onboard.

This 30M (10%) is not going to flood the market in one hit and take prices down 10%. These coins will never even be released from escrow holders wallets until projects are completed and the price rises to a level that some can be released. The 30M for all intense purposes will not exist.

I hold still a big chunk of QRK and yes i will hold 10% less share in quark. However, the value of your QRK is the main concern not the % of QRK you own.

It should be handled a bit like this. Consultation of the qrk community and if in agreement.

1. / 30M super block mined and entire amount handed to a few escrow level members.

2./  community discusses important services and features it wants to see QRK have, be it poker rooms,  some form of anon, QRK business and qrk shop set up, community manager and marketing manager elected and projects and goals set up for them with rewards set out for completion. ROI projects manager set up - this person should be in direct contact with bill to enable investment from large holders outside of the qrk community.

3./ Funds are only ever released from escrows on completion of tasks to the satisfaction of the community. Everything it fully transparent and open to inspection at all times.


The transition from the development pot to ROI projects should be the main goal here. However many things need to be in place before ROI projects are going to be attractive to outside investment.



This will also bring a lot more conversation and involvement from the community. I would like to see via bill and ROI projects a lot more active qrk holders involved with the planning and projects surrounding qrk rather than they have a few 100 bucks invested and have forgotten qrk exists. Yes it is in one way good they have absorbed a lot of qrk and so the price is easy to boost but they add nothing in terms of ideas and support. Having most of your coins holders outside of the usual crypto community makes it appear dead to this board. This board like it or not is still the main driving force behind the success or failure of a coin (not btc )


The end FACT is this, something big needs to change and change now with QRK it has put itself in a very vulnerable position. We have a dev that has no great financial interest or motivation, most qrk holders have invested and forgotten about qrk maybe even viewing it as a long term hold for years on end, and block rewards that make it of no interest to miners. This is a death spiral right there. The super block if handled correctly can change this all around. If i had my way i would make the superblock 100M. We need QRK in the hands of active and skilled people. There are plenty of skilled webservices developers and teams out there with no work. We need to get them into qrk and bring these teams on with goals they can achieve and will be rewarded for their work.

We need a skilled PR person. PR is the key to success of all business. Look at all these shitcoins with their whitepapers sucking BTC into them like there is no tomorrow. QRK's needs to bring on some talented people who have an array of skills. This combined with some purchasing of QRK induced by announcements and lots of active projects will turn this death spiral upside down.

I hope the QRK community will realise NOBODY is going to donate anything ever. EVEN if a few did donate you have a few interested people. The 30M superblock is like a 10% donation from EVERYONE in QRK. That is why EVERYONE needs to be consulted and get back here and have their say on future projects/services and features.

I know people in the community have differences of opinion here, but let's put those old disagreements behind us know and just concentrate on QRK.

I would like to get a really good debate on the positives and negatives of this idea by known quark holders. We don't want a bunch of shills for other coins clouding it all up. A vote should then take place and we should press ahead with it. I can't take looking at C M C another day and seeing a bunch of shitcoins rising and QRK falling every single day.

We need some funds and some new blood, without it (in my opinion), kiss QRK goodbye unless something huge comes out of the blue. I don't like resting my future on lucky chances though, nice to take control and ensure QRK has some chance.

New paper - Proof of Activity: Extending Bitcoin’s Proof of Work via Proof of Stake

http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/28jbw6/new_paper_proof_of_activity_extending_bitcoins/

Something for Quark to consider?

I will support real quark exchange only:

    somecoins / QRK

It is the most simple way for QRK to have use value. Only after than I might support shops.

Second thing I am willing to support should be creating Quark market at some of the biggest exchanges like cryptsy, mintpal, bittrex. It is probably too late for that.



QRK is only main coin branch which does not have its own exchange */QRK and nothing else (maybe BTC might be exception at QRK exchange).


It becomes very clear to me, "marketing" will "come" after double bottom.

Hm 30 m extra quarks will not be good for the value since there will me more quarks, so i say no to that.

Maybe Quark should wait and switch to a superior algo that hasn't been out yet. Maybe PoS without the flaws, a superior version to PoS.

Good point.   While a one time 'superblock' with a defined use is acceptable on its own, in doing that, you leave the lingering possibility it could be done again and again.  That definitely could do more harm than good.

We do need to come up with some kind of fund though.  Time to brainstorm creative ways to make it happen.  Donations are not going to cover it.

Hi cryptohunter

I am no quark holder but I can't say that i'm pro or against quark (the coin) , if we take the whole community  yeah I dislike it.

I believed the coin had a few flaws from the start.
The biggest is the distribution model... you can see its effects right now with a block reward worth 2 cents.

What i disliked were the obvious pumps by the mk guy who then switched to maxcoin and now to startcoin and the obvious lies of the wow kid digitalindustry.

One example... he bragged 1 months about quarkpaymnets , we had a website with a timer , timer went to 0 and after 6 months we have still no service. This and much more.

About the 30m block. It's the nail in the coffin.

When a country is in debt , they don't have money to pay wages ,what does the central bank do? It prints money. Out of thin air. That's why they call them fake money , fiat money.

And this is what you are going to create. Value out of thin air.
Who will hold quark when maybe tomorrow you will decide to print another 500 millions?

some ppl are resistant to logic :S thanks!

Hi niothor,

Are you a quark holder at this time. I'm not sure if you are pro qrk or not. Anyway, what do you think about the creation of a 30M super block to be held by escrows or foundation and released only for completed projects? Do you think it could work out or would you consider this a bad idea?

It seems only coins that have large development pots or have developers that devised ways to retain a lot of coins have active development and active communities.

Some people seem to think it's a good idea, i personally think if we could guarantee all the coins were put to great use for qrks benefit it would be great and get a lot more conversations going about how they could be best used.

I guess there would be some negatives to doing this but it could be worth investigating?

Honestly and take no offense... stop it.
This is not a job for you.

You have one variable in your formula that is the hashrate.
Since that variable can go in any case (sha/scrypt/whatever) by x times up and down...the formula can be applied to any other coin by simple multiplying the value of the hashrate by a factor or diving it.

It's basic mathematics.
If it doesn't work for other coins then it's a waste of time as it is false for quark also.

Also...
the hashrate follows the mining profitability
the price will not be affected by the hashrate , already debunked 10000 times myth

Made specifically for quark based on its hash rate...Quark = MH/s....SHA256 = GH/s....Scrypt = KH/s...as you know the hashing rates are not the same depending on the algo.

Make your mind.

This formula is made specifically for quark algo coins...it won't work for for BTC...it's based on the supply/demand formula.

Are you serious?
Let me tell you the only formula that works in prices?

Random number between (what vendor asks for / what buyer asks for)

Apply your formula to bitcoin price and you'll see how wrong you are.

Why can't you tie it to such a formula? This formula is based on what is used everyday all around to world to determine price indexing.