@fiatpete
It´s easy to grasp actually. One pool controls lot more than 50% of the hashrate and that allows the pool provider to potentially(!) mess up with Quark in the blink of an eye. That issue was discussed for Bitcoin with ghash.io and it was less dramatic than Quark. While digitalindustry loves to talk "attack vectors" on other coins (particularly mining monopoly), with Quark he prefers to say that a big mess that exists for at least 9 months is "something to monitor into the future". The difference between "single miner monopoly" and "pool monopoly" is of any relevance (because noone could ever know if the users on the pool are different entities) and "security measures" like checkpointing won´t prevent a potential(!) attack.
You are certainly also interested that digitalindustry was involved in staging a coin launch that was meant to become a Quark merge mining coin later on particularly to cope with the low hashrate + monopoly issue that Quark (Mimiccoin) If you missed it, you should also read this thread that documents acitivities of manipulation by digitalindustry.
Anyway, if you hold Quark I can comfort you: The pool owners wouldn´t attack Quark, because it is worth close to nothing and the userbase has shrunk essentially if you look at all existing Quark forums. They would kill the coin, but more important they would kill their reputation = their daily income.
its a hard one to grasp fully, and i'm not saying its not an issue but its something to monitor into the future.
It´s easy to grasp actually. One pool controls lot more than 50% of the hashrate and that allows the pool provider to potentially(!) mess up with Quark in the blink of an eye. That issue was discussed for Bitcoin with ghash.io and it was less dramatic than Quark. While digitalindustry loves to talk "attack vectors" on other coins (particularly mining monopoly), with Quark he prefers to say that a big mess that exists for at least 9 months is "something to monitor into the future". The difference between "single miner monopoly" and "pool monopoly" is of any relevance (because noone could ever know if the users on the pool are different entities) and "security measures" like checkpointing won´t prevent a potential(!) attack.
You are certainly also interested that digitalindustry was involved in staging a coin launch that was meant to become a Quark merge mining coin later on particularly to cope with the low hashrate + monopoly issue that Quark (Mimiccoin) If you missed it, you should also read this thread that documents acitivities of manipulation by digitalindustry.
Anyway, if you hold Quark I can comfort you: The pool owners wouldn´t attack Quark, because it is worth close to nothing and the userbase has shrunk essentially if you look at all existing Quark forums. They would kill the coin, but more important they would kill their reputation = their daily income.
anyone with any sense will see this above rant as bullish - these guys seem just desperate now.
all of these things have existed for the last 9 month as you say - and yes we can be ddos - but that will just drive interest.
I take QuarkFx desperation as a sign that he knows the imminent trend of Quark - he is further rattled by the fact that all my predictions re BTC and others have come to pass so far.
he feels that with this new attention (the reporter I just spoke to ) and other vectors, this will drive more interest in the only Crypto that is in the top ten and is actual number #1 of the non monopoly crypto.
So i welcome you having to rehash old memes to try to drive some investors away on a backwater developers forum - good times old chap -
meanwhile BTC sinks and some of that capital comes off the BTC table and into Quark -
when that occurs, (in this next leg down) - hash will rise and the majority of that hash will go to the suprnova pool ( https://qrk.suprnova.cc/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool ) as it is already developing new hash -
we will also promote it - so you see the problem is not systematic like the structurally terminal systematic issues of BTC.
the problem is dynamic and that's why Quark is a better system.
we can also fork it to keep that dynamic attribute (benefiting the most)(and benefiting all the investors) , and there is fuck all you can do, because Cryptsy and BTC38 will follow the people.
you like democracy?
there's some decentralized democracy for you.
Nice to see you using Quark too. 
