Topic: [ANN] [VIA] ★ Viacoin ★ ~ the future of digital currency ~ ★ - page 99. (Read 825850 times)
Better wait for drak's response instead spreading more fud. I will repeat that imho things are currently not looking good at all, but it's not the end of the world. My personal opinion is that marketing team should be gathered ato work on VIA's adoption. Current price can be doubled with less than 5 BTC, buying support started to show again little by little. Adoption is the key to success... features sometimes take a lot of time and lately people are kinda impatient.
is there a paperwallet where I can store some VIA savely?
Yes. It's here: https://viacoin.github.io/address-generator/
You and masternode both then stand to be sorely disappointed pretty soon. Drak is not returning a single penny. Furthermore, he feels quite entitled to do as he -and only him- pleases with it. This "was never meant to be a business", or you still think I haven't read it carefully enough?
you are one strange dude.
Whatever my "strangeness". hardly relevant, don't you think?
Wow, just wow.
It's raining rather hard, but I, on the other hand, am an excellent cook...
You and masternode both then stand to be sorely disappointed pretty soon. Drak is not returning a single penny. Furthermore, he feels quite entitled to do as he -and only him- pleases with it. This "was never meant to be a business", or you still think I haven't read it carefully enough?
you are one strange dude.
i'm going to try to stay level headed and calm. but i too am one of the early adopters of VIA (top 10, maybe even top 5 holder).
to say i am disappointed with the last few months would be putting it mildly. as lead developer, Drak has to take responsibility for the direction and adoption of VIA. he can't say that now that he's built it, his job is done. i'm not saying he has said that. but the lack of activity feels a bit like he might be feeling that way.
the ICO was very successful. to let VIA die on the vine with hundreds of bitcoins in the war chest is bizarre.
i guess my question is, why not "throw some money at the problem" and get aggressive about marketing, enhancements, new features, etc. all of which will cost some money.
by doing so, Drak stands to lose some of the BTC he has. but by not doing so, every single holder of VIA will almost certainly lose.
if Drak is not willing, for some reason, to spend the ICO coins on VIA/XCH, then i agree with masternode that returning the ICO coins that remain is the honorable thing to do.
to say i am disappointed with the last few months would be putting it mildly. as lead developer, Drak has to take responsibility for the direction and adoption of VIA. he can't say that now that he's built it, his job is done. i'm not saying he has said that. but the lack of activity feels a bit like he might be feeling that way.
the ICO was very successful. to let VIA die on the vine with hundreds of bitcoins in the war chest is bizarre.
i guess my question is, why not "throw some money at the problem" and get aggressive about marketing, enhancements, new features, etc. all of which will cost some money.
by doing so, Drak stands to lose some of the BTC he has. but by not doing so, every single holder of VIA will almost certainly lose.
if Drak is not willing, for some reason, to spend the ICO coins on VIA/XCH, then i agree with masternode that returning the ICO coins that remain is the honorable thing to do.
You and masternode both then stand to be sorely disappointed pretty soon. Drak is not returning a single penny. Furthermore, he feels quite entitled to do as he -and only him- pleases with it. This "was never meant to be a business", or you still think I haven't read it carefully enough?
All in all this was essentially an underwhelming project from the start.
actually, it was a pretty exciting project at the start. offered a heck of a lot an had great momentum.
To me it looked like a port of Counterwallet and a bit of fanfare about Peter Todd and sidechains. The whole thing was orchestrated in the altmarkets IRC channel and seemed to me like a fairly straightforward, cynical pump and dump.
Some people actually do think so. The price reflects the people's confidence.
i'm going to try to stay level headed and calm. but i too am one of the early adopters of VIA (top 10, maybe even top 5 holder).
to say i am disappointed with the last few months would be putting it mildly. as lead developer, Drak has to take responsibility for the direction and adoption of VIA. he can't say that now that he's built it, his job is done. i'm not saying he has said that. but the lack of activity feels a bit like he might be feeling that way.
the ICO was very successful. to let VIA die on the vine with hundreds of bitcoins in the war chest is bizarre.
i guess my question is, why not "throw some money at the problem" and get aggressive about marketing, enhancements, new features, etc. all of which will cost some money.
by doing so, Drak stands to lose some of the BTC he has. but by not doing so, every single holder of VIA will almost certainly lose.
if Drak is not willing, for some reason, to spend the ICO coins on VIA/XCH, then i agree with masternode that returning the ICO coins that remain is the honorable thing to do.
to say i am disappointed with the last few months would be putting it mildly. as lead developer, Drak has to take responsibility for the direction and adoption of VIA. he can't say that now that he's built it, his job is done. i'm not saying he has said that. but the lack of activity feels a bit like he might be feeling that way.
the ICO was very successful. to let VIA die on the vine with hundreds of bitcoins in the war chest is bizarre.
i guess my question is, why not "throw some money at the problem" and get aggressive about marketing, enhancements, new features, etc. all of which will cost some money.
by doing so, Drak stands to lose some of the BTC he has. but by not doing so, every single holder of VIA will almost certainly lose.
if Drak is not willing, for some reason, to spend the ICO coins on VIA/XCH, then i agree with masternode that returning the ICO coins that remain is the honorable thing to do.
Well, first of all, it is unclear what your purpose is: On one hand you state "With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing." only to, in the next paragraph, state: "I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.", which mean the exact opposite... which is it?
you're just not reading it carefully enough. by "do the right thing" masternode means return some of the ICO coins.
If Steve Jobs himself was dumping Apple stocks on the market, would that give shareholders confidence in holding their Apple shares?
He did, and it didn't.Oh yeah... He did when he left Apple. Then look what happened, the stock went down. In VIA 's case, price is falling regardless of who is dumping.
I really hope this project turns around though.
When threads turn into price discussions, it is usually the death of a coin. Price of VIA will fall until a big promoter picks it up for peanuts. I would buy more, but only at around 1/10 of todays price. At 500sat a big quantity would be a good punt.
better sell now before you sell at 1000 satoshi. it's all about cutting losses. 50% loss is better then 90% loss ...
I am not a seller. I will hold either for success or 0. I just would be prepared to buy and risk a little more at a lower level.
Either VIA will be widely adopted as an alternative blockchain, or it will slowly fade.
As long as the devs are working to improve the technicals, lower prices are irrelevant. Fact : There will be owners for every single unit of VIA when it becomes either more valuable than BTC, or becomes 1sat. I want to be one of those people, either way.
I agree with you on this. I bought a lot of VIA when the value was about nine times higher as at present, this was my own decision.
There is no use in dumping it now, I will hold till it either goes to zero or gets the value it IMHO should have.
I won't waste anyone's time. I just got off the phone with Drak. It was not an easy conversation. I mentioned the idea of making an assessment of the situation, letting us know how much money is left and to consider returning remaining BTC to investors. His reponse was basically that was that this was never presented as an investment, which obviously didn't settle well with me (and makes VIA appear more and more like a coin grab). However on his behalf as we discussed it more, and he seemed open to the possibility of this.
My estimation is that the burn rate on this project has been somewhere around $5k per month. I can disclose those numbers later, but I have pretty intimate knowledge about whats going on and the financials. Even before considering something like this, we need to have full transparency.
We really just need to assess the likelyhood of the success of the project. My view is that it's extremely low. Even if there were some interest from Patrick Byrne, it's just that interest. And I don't really see how any large players can be willing to taking any kind of gamble on a coin that is in utter shambles. We have to ask ourselves what real competitive advantage does VIA present over BTC or any other coin that might get the interest of others. It really is just speed, and that is no longer the case in the ALT world (with DRK having 3.5 second trustless confirmations) and soon to be gone with respects to BTC as both CHAIN and Blockstream (sidechains) are massively funded and attempting to solve specifically the speed issue of BTC confirmations.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/chain-2 (Chain has $13.7M in funding)
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blockstream (Blockstream, who is researching sidechains, has $21M in funding)
So we can safely say the speed advantage over BTC will very likely be gone withing 6 to 18 months, which outlines specificall the window VIA has. When BTC becomes faster, so will Counterparty, and that kills XCH's chances of being a success. Now if you look at adoption and community growth over the last 8 months and use it as reference, it's pretty easy to see things have literally moved backwards, not grown. With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing.
At this point let's get all the info. Look at where money has been spent and what remains. Let's get disclosure on what's really on the horizon, and figure out a reasonable outcome from a fair assessment of where things stand. I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.
My estimation is that the burn rate on this project has been somewhere around $5k per month. I can disclose those numbers later, but I have pretty intimate knowledge about whats going on and the financials. Even before considering something like this, we need to have full transparency.
We really just need to assess the likelyhood of the success of the project. My view is that it's extremely low. Even if there were some interest from Patrick Byrne, it's just that interest. And I don't really see how any large players can be willing to taking any kind of gamble on a coin that is in utter shambles. We have to ask ourselves what real competitive advantage does VIA present over BTC or any other coin that might get the interest of others. It really is just speed, and that is no longer the case in the ALT world (with DRK having 3.5 second trustless confirmations) and soon to be gone with respects to BTC as both CHAIN and Blockstream (sidechains) are massively funded and attempting to solve specifically the speed issue of BTC confirmations.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/chain-2 (Chain has $13.7M in funding)
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blockstream (Blockstream, who is researching sidechains, has $21M in funding)
So we can safely say the speed advantage over BTC will very likely be gone withing 6 to 18 months, which outlines specificall the window VIA has. When BTC becomes faster, so will Counterparty, and that kills XCH's chances of being a success. Now if you look at adoption and community growth over the last 8 months and use it as reference, it's pretty easy to see things have literally moved backwards, not grown. With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing.
At this point let's get all the info. Look at where money has been spent and what remains. Let's get disclosure on what's really on the horizon, and figure out a reasonable outcome from a fair assessment of where things stand. I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.
Well, first of all, it is unclear what your purpose is: On one hand you state "With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing." only to, in the next paragraph, state: "I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.", which mean the exact opposite... which is it?
More importantly, the whole thing is just an exercise in futility for Drak, obviously, has it wrong, as wrong as it can be had, from the get going for this -and every other crypto- is NOTHING BUT and investment. Drank considers it, evidently, as a grant that investors/supporters have extended to him to do as he pleases... and that is exactly what he has been doing and what he pretends to keep on doing until that "grant" is extinguished... and that including he himself selling every single coin he has. That much is clear. As equally clear it now is that this project was doom, from its absurd concept to its ultimate dismissal. There's no chance of success, none, with or without transparency -and you are getting none, by the way, no matter what kool-aid he has kind of given you in the end-. I will repeat one again so the idea sinks perfectly crystal clear: The money collected is considered by Drak as a grant -or a gift- so he can pursue, at his own will and caprice, this exercise in futility under the pretenses of "helping crypto". As clearly visible from any and all angles, this has been a constant trip into disaster until know when it can no longer be ignored that it is going straight into the ground. What to do? Well, I have no answers to that since it is, quite literally, beyond "doing anything" at this point. And, contrary to what "masternode" tries to convince himself of, Drak lacks every single quality, every single one -not to mention disposition- which would give this project even the slimmest of chances of success.
I won't waste anyone's time. I just got off the phone with Drak. It was not an easy conversation. Among other things, I mentioned the idea of making an assessment of the situation, letting us know how much money is left and to consider returning remaining BTC to investors (which btw, was proposed to me by another member of this community and one of the 5 largest VIA holders). His reponse was basically that was that this was never presented as an investment, which obviously didn't settle well with me (and makes VIA appear more and more like a coin grab). However on his behalf as we discussed it more he seemed open to the possibility of this.
My estimation is that the burn rate on this project has been somewhere around $5k per month. I can disclose those numbers later, but I have pretty intimate knowledge about whats going on and the financials. Even before considering something like this, we need to have full transparency.
We really just need to assess the likelyhood of the success of the project. My view is that it's extremely low. Even if there were some interest from Patrick Byrne, it's just that interest. And I don't really see how any large players can be willing to taking any kind of gamble on a coin that is in utter shambles. We have to ask ourselves what real competitive advantage does VIA present over BTC or any other coin that might get the interest of others. It really is just speed, and that is no longer the case in the ALT world (with DRK having 3.5 second trustless confirmations) and soon to be gone with respects to BTC as both CHAIN and Blockstream (sidechains) are massively funded and attempting to solve specifically the speed issue of BTC confirmations.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/chain-2 (Chain has $13.7M in funding)
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blockstream (Blockstream, who is researching sidechains, has $21M in funding)
So we can safely say the speed advantage over BTC will very likely be gone within 6 to 18 months, which outlines specificall the window VIA has. When BTC becomes faster, so will Counterparty, and that kills XCH's chances of being a success. Now if you look at VIA / XCH adoption and community growth over the last 8 months and use it as reference, it's pretty easy to see things have literally moved backwards, not grown. With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing in my opinion.
At this point let's get all the info. Look at where money has been spent and what remains. Let's get disclosure on what's really on the horizon, and figure out a reasonable outcome from a fair assessment of where things stand. I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.
My estimation is that the burn rate on this project has been somewhere around $5k per month. I can disclose those numbers later, but I have pretty intimate knowledge about whats going on and the financials. Even before considering something like this, we need to have full transparency.
We really just need to assess the likelyhood of the success of the project. My view is that it's extremely low. Even if there were some interest from Patrick Byrne, it's just that interest. And I don't really see how any large players can be willing to taking any kind of gamble on a coin that is in utter shambles. We have to ask ourselves what real competitive advantage does VIA present over BTC or any other coin that might get the interest of others. It really is just speed, and that is no longer the case in the ALT world (with DRK having 3.5 second trustless confirmations) and soon to be gone with respects to BTC as both CHAIN and Blockstream (sidechains) are massively funded and attempting to solve specifically the speed issue of BTC confirmations.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/chain-2 (Chain has $13.7M in funding)
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blockstream (Blockstream, who is researching sidechains, has $21M in funding)
So we can safely say the speed advantage over BTC will very likely be gone within 6 to 18 months, which outlines specificall the window VIA has. When BTC becomes faster, so will Counterparty, and that kills XCH's chances of being a success. Now if you look at VIA / XCH adoption and community growth over the last 8 months and use it as reference, it's pretty easy to see things have literally moved backwards, not grown. With Drak at the helm, I just can't see how that could move forward enough so to capitalize on the window of opportunity before it shuts, leading me to believe the likelyhood of the success of this coin is extremely small (<1%). Small enough that it's clearly not worth pursuing in my opinion.
At this point let's get all the info. Look at where money has been spent and what remains. Let's get disclosure on what's really on the horizon, and figure out a reasonable outcome from a fair assessment of where things stand. I may be at odds with how Drak has handled VIA so far, but I think he has it in him to do the right thing from here.
If Steve Jobs himself was dumping Apple stocks on the market, would that give shareholders confidence in holding their Apple shares?
He did, and it didn't.Oh yeah... He did when he left Apple. Then look what happened, the stock went down. In VIA 's case, price is falling regardless of who is dumping.
I really hope this project turns around though.
When threads turn into price discussions, it is usually the death of a coin. Price of VIA will fall until a big promoter picks it up for peanuts. I would buy more, but only at around 1/10 of todays price. At 500sat a big quantity would be a good punt.
better sell now before you sell at 1000 satoshi. it's all about cutting losses. 50% loss is better then 90% loss ...
I am not a seller. I will hold either for success or 0. I just would be prepared to buy and risk a little more at a lower level.
Either VIA will be widely adopted as an alternative blockchain, or it will slowly fade.
As long as the devs are working to improve the technicals, lower prices are irrelevant. Fact : There will be owners for every single unit of VIA when it becomes either more valuable than BTC, or becomes 1sat. I want to be one of those people, either way.
Just to let you know I am preparing a reply to everyone's questions, but it may take some time. I have IRL appointments on Monday.
To me it looked like a port of Counterwallet and a bit of fanfare about Peter Todd and sidechains. The whole thing was orchestrated in the altmarkets IRC channel and seemed to me like a fairly straightforward, cynical pump and dump.
didnt feel that way to me at the time, but looking back i can see your point.
It was a different time and place back them. ICOs were selling like hotcakes. BTC was almost $700. Lots of enthusiasm filled the air. Can it really be less than a year ago?
To me it looked like a port of Counterwallet and a bit of fanfare about Peter Todd and sidechains. The whole thing was orchestrated in the altmarkets IRC channel and seemed to me like a fairly straightforward, cynical pump and dump.
didnt feel that way to me at the time, but looking back i can see your point.
All in all this was essentially an underwhelming project from the start.
actually, it was a pretty exciting project at the start. offered a heck of a lot an had great momentum.
To me it looked like a port of Counterwallet and a bit of fanfare about Peter Todd and sidechains. The whole thing was orchestrated in the altmarkets IRC channel and seemed to me like a fairly straightforward, cynical pump and dump.
All in all this was essentially an underwhelming project from the start.
actually, it was a pretty exciting project at the start. offered a heck of a lot an had great momentum.
The heavy handed thread moderation was a turnoff from the get-go. All in all this was essentially an underwhelming project from the start.
Drak if you serious about your work something has to start happening...
he may be too busy trading BTC to respond
Jump to: