Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming) - page 71. (Read 790417 times)

Don't worry, I will answer everything and everybody.

It's true what they say, the best antidote against cockroaches is SUNLIGHT!

So I'm gonna shed some light on this soon, and I'm gonna bring the biggest flood lights I can find.



But currently I am working on the next update. It's all about priorities, I owe that to my patrons.

Stay tuned.

As I've been particularly interested in the Bitcoin Full node idea for some time now, I'll be thinking about how best to deliver that idea and then let the market decide.

I'm not 100% sure Georgem is as keen, so I think I'll look at different options.

I haven't sold a single SPR that I have mined or bought, but I have donated quite a few for bounties, giveaways and donations. I'll put my SPR's into cold storage and see what the future brings.

I'll keep a watch on what's what, but I do want to see my ideas for supporting Bitcoin (or any blockchain that wants to give it a try) go into production, so: Peace Out.

As I understand the landscape, the dev will dev if we pay him 

Just another day in cryptoland.

Will put thinking cap on.

I can't match this assertion with the Spreadcoin rich list. The distribution ratio is similar to what it was a couple of years ago, iirc and doesn't seem to have changed significantly. A statistical analysis would be definitive (to a known degree of error) but I don't have the time to hack one up right now.

But the obvious first question must be: is the rich list actually representative?

I've never been entirely comfortable with pricing stashes according to what they would bring at the current price assuming infinite liquidity.

There is a price history, so it is possible to make an informed assumption of the reigning price at the time of each contributing tx. That'll yield a rough'n'ready balance sheet for each of the accounts, give some idea of the relative position of the bagholders. If bagholders are an issue.

Cheers

Graham

3 month graph looks like Baldwin Street with a  ski jump at bottom.
probably some cryptic  traders term for it no doubt.
maybe a saucepan double bottom cup handle hockey stick boat anchor or some such thing

big brain big post big wall word

no read to long

need big worm?

buy worm coin. dev here no worm coin dev

At 0-10% per year time input, that means....about 3 years worth of Stay Tuned!

On top of the already wasted two years of support. Oh, unless people pay?

No thanks.

Im comming back after a year and it still the same stuff and complaining, happy i sold at 16k

To be honest i liked spread and the idea but this dev isnt working it. Might be wrong but the coin price says enough.

Quote from: georgem on Today at 07:07:52 am
Pokeytex wrote an interesting PM, and I'm going to address it publicly here:

Quote
From: pokeytex
Hello Georgem - I just wanted to take a moment to say hi and possibly give my advice to you.  Take it or leave it as you may.  I like you and I think you are doing and going to do great work on SPR!  Not because I am invested but because I see the potential in the designs and ideas you put out.  I am with you the whole way and hope that you are able to make it all work out.  With that said, I would like to advise you on not giving any timelines.  People hold your word as gospel and frankly I have fallen into the category once in a while especially with the Christmas "present" comment a couple weeks ago.  My advice is to not disclose any time frame and post maybe what you are working on.  Under promise and over deliver.  I know you have a day job and I am sure your personal life is as hectic as mine with family and all but the natives are getting restless and the negativity on the forum is starting to grow like a cancer.  If you have anything to satiate the appetites temporarily please post it.  From there - no more deadlines!  - Be well - Pokeytex

Thanks for your kind words.

Yes, you are right. 

But even if I didn't give a deadline, someone is always going to complain about something.
IMHO my wrong deadline estimations are the least of SPR's problems (and they will go away over time).

It's this whole "faux urgency" as someone else stated, that goes on in certain parts of the community.
That's why a certain brand of people seems a little bit restless right now!
My wrong deadlines don't correlate with the "faux urgency" in their head, and that is what causes them "cognitive dissonance" and ultimately makes them snap!

We have a tiny group of people who own an insane amount of SPR (probably 5 Million in the hands of no more than 10 people),
and they can't wait to do "something" with it, they don't give a fuck about decentralization etc.
They want that quick masternode-wealth-redistribution-scam, do some scammy PR, move the price 20x-30x, dump their coins and be done with it.

I have more long term goals, believe me. 

It is true that I keep planning deadlines as if I was already working pretty much 100% on this project, when the reality during the last 12 months has been on average 0-10%.
I probably do this unconsciously (out of gleeful anticipation), but then my dayjob always catches up on me with a loud wake-up call.
In fact, that is the reason why I am working on this patronage scheme, so that there is a possibility of gradually increasing the amount of time I can invest every month.

But your advice is good, and I will take it.

And BTW, I don't mind that some people are starting to act "cancerous" on BCT, they have always been doing that, and if anything I always welcome it when someone shows me their true colors.
It helps me adapt, adjust my wrong expectations and choose more fitting solutions to counteract this. (I am working on a pretty thorough solution here...  )

Anyway, thanks for your patience,
all I can say is, I will be here, 2017, 2018, 2019... etc.
 

Very interesting stuff coming,
and the first priority should be to have more regular updates, indeed.

P.S.: I hope you don't mind that I post your PM publicly, but in the interest of transparency from now on I will be posting publicly any PM I receive to address them accordingly.
It should help everybody (and especially newcomers) to figure out what is going on behind the scenes.
You won't believe the PMs I am getting, lmao.
Yours is one of the good ones. 

@Georgem - I don't mind that you quote my PM.  I have nothing to hide.  I think your responses will help myself and others understand your position better.  Remember we are all here because of your efforts.  I don't know anything about coding so I cannot not help like others want to but I can tell you after losing all of my coins last January (to a hacker) SPR is one of only (5) coins I am in  now.  I have mined all of my SPR and am by no means SPR rich! Yet! I believe in SPR and what the mechanics will be when all comes to fruition.  This includes the decentralization part of it.  Your last project update with the various coins in the same wallet really stoked me.  I will continue to donate to you when I can afford to so it helps you with your efforts on development.    Lastly, don't get frustrated with the community.  I know it is hard sometimes.  Please understand we are all foaming at the mouth to see what you create.   We are a proud community.  Just take a deep breath and put one foot in front of the other when dealing with us.  We can be impatient sometimes.  ** Disclaimer: I know I shouldn't use "WE" because I sound like I speak for the community.  Believe me I have no delusions that I represent the community! **  - Peace out - Pokeytex

This is an appeal to futility. A logical fallacy. It doesn't matter that someone will complain about something. This does not detract from the arguments that are being made.

If wrong deadline estimations are the least of SPR's problems then what is the most of them?


Your comment about people not caring about decentralization is a baseless generalization. There are perhaps people who don't care about it, but not everyone.

Unfortunately, the faux urgency you speak of here has been wholly brought about by your deadlines.

You have said them with such utter confidence can you blame us for believing them?

Had I been told about you only working on the project "0-10" percent of the time I would have put my money elsewhere and come back to the project. No problem. Instead, other investors and I have been misled by your timelines time and time again to our detriment. Perhaps even I could have put my money into a project that I could make a lot of money and then come back here and help you out with larger donations.
So even you have prevented your own gains, though it has not been visible.

Frustrating is an understatement. I highly doubt people would be so anxious if you hadn't misled them with apparently completely unrealistic expectations for when things would be done.


Thank you for your honesty. It is highly appreciated. I am confused as to why you would keep up this facade of working a ton on SPR while you were actually not working all that much, but alas, here we are.


I don't think anyone brings up these points out of some visceral hate for you or the project. Everyone here wants this project to succeed for various reasons. You have admitted to not working as much as you have made it appear you have been working. Labeling the community cancerous for finally saying something is rather ridiculous.

I think I speak for more than a few people when I say it is hard not to feel as though we have been disrespected and personally lied to. It inspires some level of resentment to be perfectly honest. So if my posts come off as harsh I hope you understand where I am coming from.


Anyway, Pokeytex raises good points. I think avoiding deadlines is a good way of proceeding less you want to risk inspiring more angry bongo drumming from the natives.  

I'm gonna wave the “experience” card at this point. I've been an open source contributor for about 16 years, starting with pyapache back in 2001 and later with the RDFLib team and other projects thereafter.

To quote Roy Batty ... “I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.”

Cheers

Graham

It's exactly like that::


The old ones are the good ones...there is no I in TEAM.

well ...

im still here - still watching ... but not 'inputting' anywhere near as much as when mr spread was around ...

as much as i would agree with all that is said about the closure and ennexure of help with georgem - he has never shown him self to be a dev that is on the negative side - like most of the the rip-off devs in crypto today ...

i felt frustrated also that i was never included from day one when georgem 'took over' as one of the original 'helpers' of the project as i was in constant communication on and off the forum with mr spread - and as such my input is always minimal ...

having said that - when i was active with mr spread those eons ago - i was approached by many community members ( when i was still using the chrysophylax profile ) and asked the same two fundamental questions ...

do you think georgem is a capable dev - and do you think spreadcoin will stand the test of time ...

the answer then - as is now - is yes and yes ...

i disagree with the WAY georgem works - but he is a dev that does do this in his own time - and he is a dev that admitted from the beginning that he is LEARNING as he continues with the spreadcoin project ... this learning curve doesnt stop because he has set a deadline - albeit many very naive deadlines ...

what everyone seems to miss here is a very simple fact ... its an OPENSOURCE project - and as the well informed and colloquially elegant gjhiggins has pointed out - ANYONE who is capable of developing can help with this project and submit pull requests to the git ... the owner of the git ( georgem in this case of his git ) can either reject or accept and merge or ignore and delete the pull request ...

if the devs who wish to help development dont like this approach - FORK the project and create something of equal and better value than the time consuming project this one has become ... easy ...

we would have done this a millennium ago - had it not been for the lack of developer and community support on our end ... now we have an infrastructure which ive personally been building ( and expending huge sums of cash ) for almost three years - that rival some of the large corporates ( for crypto only ) - and have a 'theteam' to maximize the effect of the development for this project - but still have this main issue of the longevity of the wait times between updates and development ... we dont give deadlines - we just publish after development is done ...

so in regards to georgem and his development that he refuses to share on the public arena ( opensource git commits ) then that is HIS prerogative and he commits in his own time ... if community supports that - and complains at the same time - then so be it ...

otherwise - if there is a better option and the support is there - that option should be explored seriously ...

#crysx

Moreover, even conceding that the approach thus far to developing this project has been the result of some strategy intended to keep Spreadcoin competitive, it would be nigh impossible to argue that it has been a successful one.

In arguing for the success of a project one would likely point invariably to price, however there are other measures as well. These include strength of community, technical progress, strength and growth of dev team, popularity.

Price has collapsed.

The majority of the community doesn't trust Georgem. He has become like the boy who cried wolf, though unlike the boy who cried wolf, it is not Georgem who suffers for his missed deadlines and, up to this point, false promises. It is the community. The people who have also have dedicated time and money to this project.

Thus far technical progress is not visible or transparent. Nor is there context as to where it stands in the broader scheme of development.

All former devs and team members have long since left as they too became far too frustrated.

These are facts not my feelings. Evidenced by countless examples.

Not one box can be checked as a measure of success.

This will, with a high probability, be ignored, dismissed or labeled as FUD as have all past posts addressing things that should be worked on improving.


Georgem, I hope this doesn't inspire some resentment towards me in you. These are legitimate concerns for the project. The community is disempowered and we are in the unfortunate spot of hoping that you can pull through with something while simultaneously being unable to trust much of what you say.

occams razor and all that...
i do believe you nailed it my friend, IMO

It's probably a lot simpler than all that.

This is his hobby.

Something to do when he is not busy doing something he thinks is more important or he thinks has potential to make more money.

We all attribute far more value to being here than Georgem.

If I'm understanding your post correctly, you're suggesting that Georgem operates under the assumption that other devs would want to work on this project and compete with it. His resulting behavior as a developer is thus guided by a strategic effort to box competition out and hold his cards close to his chest?

I would find this hard to believe. Especially because there have been a plethora of opportunities to further this project in ways that would make it more competitive. The protocol of long silences, ignoring many community concerns, and self-imposing seemingly impossible deadlines actually makes the coin more vulnerable to failure (other people taking idea and running with it or some other variation).

Essentially, the inference that Georgem is acting strategically from his segregated approach to development seems entirely incompatible with other behaviors he has exhibited. Not to mention he has never explicitly explained his reasoning for keeping things so obfuscated.

That may be a misperception. georgem and I had a difference in opinion over nomenclature and he was quite explicit that his perspective entertained multiple contributors:

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=408.msg3068#msg3068


A segregated approach is a natural outcome of such a perspective and shouldn't necessarily be considered as deliberately exclusionary, merely competitive.

Cheers

Graham