Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | True Decentralization (No Pools) | Testing New Masternodes - page 379. (Read 810079 times)

I agree. If implemented using the term Masternodes is the way to go I think.

Very well said.  However, if Mr. Spread decides to implement DRK features, I would strongly recommend not renaming Masternodes to Spreadnodes.  I would keep them named Masternodes.  Not everything needs to be rebranded and most people know what masternodes are and respect the name and functionality.  I would also keep Darksend as Darksend.  If Spreadcoin was a scam coin, then sure, rename everything and try to rebrand it as your own.  But because this coin has its own innovations that would naturally function very well with DRK innovations, there's no reason to rebrand.  Nobody is renaming the blockchain because it is a trusted technology of Bitcoin.  But they're sure improving upon it with additional innovations.

yes,14.9 works,but if you have 6X cards,the official driver doesn't support.

You need 14.9 drivers.

What kind of mistake? why flies?

now promotion is quite neccesary.

Problems happen, it is unrealistic to expect everything to work perfectly all the time.

What is important is how problems are dealt with. If they are admitted and addressed, and get fixed, it's all good, you build trust, which to me as an investor is far more important than the day to day price on some exchange.  I invest in developers, not 1-hr MACD chart voodoo.

And you have solved that well too
Anyway, I have been mining since the very start, and think you are doing a great job

I actually didn't expect such acclaim. Maybe compared to usual effort my work looks good but I don't think that I'm doing anything special. If people trust in my coin I should try to meet their expectations and I don't want my work to gone in vain. I hear many stories about scam devs who just make some profit and run away. I'm not following many other coins and I don't know if such behavior is widespread here but I don't want to be one of those devs.

That said, not everything went smoothly under my command. When doing hardfork I was very worried that something may went wrong, and what do you think? blockchain stalled and no new blocks were generated, this was very anxious time for me.

Easy to miss, the coin was quite low profile early on (launched 29 July 2014) and wide-scale interest is only just kicking in.

You may find it worth skimming through the old posts on this thread to get a sense of the high level of cohesion and confidence in the dev that was shown by the early community, e.g. the way this: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8553565 played out.


Cheers

Graham

P.S. Mr Spread, 3 PRs for your consideration.

No you haven't.

SPR could be trading at 10x the current price by the end of January, with 500+ Spreadnodes providing anon for those that wanted it and a better return than mining for those that ran them.

There are many reasons DRK has been far more successful in the market than the CN clones (which are the only other anon solutions, everything else is closed source bullshit and vapourware) or just about any other alt, and technicalities aside, ironically enough the main reason IMO is that Evan Duffield has always been 100% open, honest, and trustworthy, and has done the right thing for the long term, damn the current price. DRK has had some tough times, but its supporters trust the developer, not on blind faith but because they have been given real reason to do so. That's a rare thing in our little playground. That's invaluable.

You also need to stop thinking of the crypto scene as the market. It isn't. You shouldn't give a damn about it, you should care about the real market, big money, the real world. The real world can use and rely on a truly decentralised currency. It is never going to put money into a currency that relies on a few centralised pools for its blockchain security. Ever.

The DRK code fixes one of Bitcoins weaknesses, but Mr Spread's pool-denying solution fixes the far bigger one: centralisation.

BTC will never fix it's centralisation problem, big money will always laugh at it for the flawed toy that it is and walk away.

SPR, uniquely among PoW coins, has the potential to remain resilient and functional against a serious adversary. That has real value, it was the original selling point of Bitcoin, but Bitcoin has long since abandoned the concept.

Still early 

I missed this coin in the early time

big whales are waiting for 14.9 AMD driver that supports 6X cards,anyone has mod inf file?

Good time to mine

This is one of the coins I was referring to I when I replied to one of your posts in the Darkcoin thread.    

I share your concerns regarding centralized mining.

I hope we can leave our differences/arguments in the Darkcoin thread behind.

  

The very unique thing about Spreadcoin is there aren't going to be any multipools.  A LOT of hashrate in altcoins comes from multipools.  The thing about multipools though, is the vast majority of the coins are quickly sold on exchanges which leads to constant downward pressure in a coin.

The only people mining Spreadcoin are those interested in Spreadcoin.  Not because some algorithm says it's profitable as is the case with multipools, but because the miner thinks the coin has potential.  Such miners tend to hold on to a large percentage of their coins.

This fact, coupled with the upward price pressure of implementing masternodes (if Mr. Spread decides to take that direction) could result in incredible upward movement in the price of SPR over a very short time period.  Such movement will attract the interest of others which will result in additional hashrate.

Most coins hashrate comes before price.  I believe SPR will see the opposite because of its pool-free innovation.

I haven't been this excited about a coin since I came across Darkcoin very early in its life.

some big whales may dump when the hashrate is low and price is high.

FTFY.

Best one mines the heck out of it now then, eh? 

the net hashrate of SPR is not high