Good! Being listed on Coinmarketcap surely should attract new users, as CMC has developed into the "rating agency" of the altcoin world. Well, market cap still is tiny (about 12.000 USD) but bids are slowly growing.
It certainly could attract purely speculative capital too, but this is not too bad as so BTER would be able to collect some fees from trading. And maybe other exchanges considering to add it.
(Regarding pools, unfortunately I have no technical knowledge about that.)
I am mostly a peercoiner but slimcoin has gotten my attention because of it being the first proof of burn currency, at first that was a slight curiosity but after trying it out I noticed one thing. Slimcoin has a much better incentive to keep a node online all the time than peercoin,
That's true - I come from Peercoin too, but this is an advantage of Proof of Burn. The problem is if you apply this model to Proof of stake, it would be a "rich getting richer" game, as large holders probably will get much more rewards than today. In Slimcoin's Proof-of-burn, not the rich but the people which take most risk are being rewarded, so the reward structure is good in the way it was implemented.
(ot: That's why I would oppose this change in Peercoin, although I admit that I will have to recheck the math of this reward structure. What can be done there is to encourage the users to send higher transaction fees (e.g. changing the "burned fee" from 0.01 to 0.008 and encourage the users to complete the 0.01 fee via the standard value of the client, so 0.002 would be sent to the minter).)Anyway, I was thinking of ways to increase adoption of slimcoin, not just to have people buying a few as a speculation but to actually have them burn some and become part of the network. My idea is this: change the protocol so that when you burn coins you can specify the burned coins to be associated with a different address instead of the one you burned from. This would allow me to send someone burned coins but it would not allow for the trading of burned coins.
That's a very good idea ... burnt tips! I have no idea though if this is technically feasible. From my layman's point of view there should be a way to do this, but it would need a new transaction type, I guess. ( it should have to automatically transfer from address a (donator) -> address b (beneficiary) -> burn address, without the donator having to know the beneficiary's private key)
??