I've also been following this thread. I respectfully disagree that turtlecoin won't benefit from being on a legitimate exchange.
It seems like the crux of the problem is accessibility. No one can buy the coin without fear because look at all the drama and issues people are having over these two exchanges that no one even knows about.
If the coin is as solid in code as this thread and GitHub purports, then it deserves to be on an exchange of reputation. Even EtherDelta would be fine, too bad it's not an ERC20 token.
I think there are other underlying issues, maybe not with the code, but with funding. A coin just can't exist with 0 funding, look at dogecoin. The devs are probably leaking money in missed revenue via volunteer time. And maybe the warm community isn't as warm as they'd like us to believe. Maybe no one wants to pitch in with the high exchange listing fees, and I can't blame them. They're in the tens of thousands.
So I think the bottom line is, everyone is coding and volunteering for free. No one is willing to spend on this coin anywhere past simply investing in it for their own personal gain. It's a fundamental error... there's no funding, so there's no progress. After a bit, the main devs won't be able to work for free because it's causing a lot of missed revenue on their real lives.
No one is willing to pony up any significant amount of money to get this coin listed because, well, this coin is simply a silly meme to them. That's what this coin attracts... people who want to have fun. Donating thousands is a serious endeavor, and one that this community isn't prepared to commit to. They just want to have fun.
So while the devs scramble to secretly secure funding, they'll throw a pretty solid cover excuse that two exchanges are enough and at this time more exchanges won't advance TurtleCoin's cause. But in reality, everyone can see that isn't the case.
And as can be seen from the rapid price depreciation of the coin, the coin's economy is suffering severely from these substellar exchanges with issues. And if the coin doesn't get on solid exchanges, the price will either stagnate or continue to drop. When the price drops even more, less people will be attracted to the coin and the turtle community because they'll feel like it has no potential.
When a new coin's price spirals downward, it's interpreted as a deadly sign by almost anyone. Coupled with the troll / humor'ish nature of the coin... it's just too many bad signs. No one will see it's trying to be a serious project.
I can foresee this coin stagnating in price the longer it stays on these two bad excahges. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But even when these two exchanges get their wallets fixed (why do they need to get their wallets fixed? Why does Turtlecoin have so many bugs that it's demanding so much of a pain from both exchanges in upgrades/updates and having to join their discord just to get help?)
It's just one bad sign after another. Stable code? Maybe not.
But, to be fair, if it crawls to 1 or 2 satoshi, I will invest in. Anything higher than that and I could end up with the rest of the stagnation.
That is an interesting observation but with some, significant misgivings and flaws in it's analysis:
1) The point of TurtleCoin is to prove that it can be done without investment, and from a standing start.
2) Developers are well remunerated in their personal lives, this is a technical exercise with many more devs than many bigger coins. If some come and go, the coin will live.
3) The code is based on ByteCoin, which is very well established. But with 30s block times, it has shown up floors. Which have been fixed. TradeOgre's wallet is currently perfectly functional, i've just tested it. So it is now only TradeSatoshi.
4) "Proper Exchanges", yes they cost money. But that is not the stumbling block. At the moment the coin is in it's infancy, significant effort needs to be placed into improving the codebase and the tooling before approaching bigger exchanges, because if there are issues we would run the risk of bad rep (much like this).
5) Dividing the market even further would be a really negative thing, adding another exchange so quickly resulted in lower trade volumes and volume does not magically appear just because you add exchanges.
6) So, as our plan was to tackle exchanges in Q2 of this year, we will probably continue to ignore requests for yet more exchanges until we are in a position to do so.
7) Developers are not seeking any funding, where do you get your information from?
So, your post being quite disparaging and also showing a very naive understanding of open source communities and how they function aside, you fail to grasp the fact that TRTL launched at 1 sat and is now 5/6 sat 1 month later. For a coin that has only existed for 2 months those are exceptional numbers.
Hence the "Slow and Steady" mantra, volatility comes from rapid and unsubstantiated rises. I see no reason why it is unreasonable to secure the codebase, add value and features beyond the base code and add value through technical merit, that is where the transition from a bit of fun and meme's to a validated project will come. Throwing money at that does not help that situation, it takes time and dedication.
You round on Discord, and say it's not friendly, but I still see no evidence of your ban, what was your username I will investigate and I apologise unreservedly if you were banned unfairly.