Topic: [ANN] (WC) | WhiteCoin | BIG NEWS: Foundation, investors & more ☯ whitecoin.info - page 35. (Read 759239 times)

I'm all for Official Membership, its a great way to raise founds, also using it as an official voting tool can be done properly without the fear of fake account. It has to be manage by the Foundation, you become a member of the foundation by registering with a valid ID.

Now, before people bitch about anonymity, remember this has nothing to do with wallets, address, transaction, spending of any kind or how much you have... and since the WCF will be an official non-profit recognized by the Government of Canada, it is protected under the law and privacy will be respected. This would be a solely voting membership, no different of your Costco membership or political affiliation.

This way we get an honest community, engage and able to vote, transparent and totally legit. If you want to vote, you have to be a registered member.

Does this make sense?

I like the idea of a membership for voting as it does raise coin and is a little more honest, however we may still have questions raised about how you would prevent hundreds of bogus membership registrations (votes). Again, we are back to buying votes, no?

Posts by after launching the survey, gather the Privacy Function 2 has been voted by almost all (maybe all).
What you think if we start with an update of privacy with the new logo and delivered once we consider the following?
It should be easy to finance and (hopefully not mistaken) relatively fast to implement.

1

I can see that we have a strong comunity with a lot of ideas and expectations, a president and VC with enough knowledge to drive the coin and foundation, but we need to have a full time dev...hope could be Mindfox but if he is busy we need another one supervised by him.
I can donate 500k for that and I can found more investors interested in WC but we need a timeline. I think with many shitcoins around, have a trustable coin is our best value.
It is the time to do a great step before depression starts again. We have everything to triumph but we have to improve how to develop the features.
My two WC.
All the best!

Let's just focus on one of the above tasks. Each time one is completed you will see the price of WC jump. This means it will require less WC to get subsequent jobs done.

However it would be even better if our lead dev was fully invested in WC and not cashing straight out to btc anyway.

well said malbee, tevayo...

Thank you for answering mogonzo, all I needed to hear 
I`ll give it a try, not been there for awhile   

Cheers
B.

Totally agree that we need to be more specific when requesting the improvements we want to WC.
Democracy is good about asking the people vote for what we want to do, but should not be a burden that prevents rapid decision making.
By this I mean that's fine survey, but limit them to a time (eg Sunday), from there we decide what is done, is budgeted, paid and deployed.
Of course all under the supervision of the WCF and the Director of Development Team, Mindfox.

Hey just to answer your questions about chunky:

We can't change the pool name as the foundation does not own it.

In terms of profit algo, it's working great, returns have been consistent and on the high end of daily averages for some time now. Considering the multiport varies between 100-500MH, and we can't always mine very high difficulty coins, I think the profit algo works great.

What aspect of the service from the pool aren't you happy with? We provide daily payouts, transparency for balances, and we resolve all support issues. Always working to improve, but I'm wondering if maybe it's been a while since you've given chunky a try?

All the best,

Chris

I'd like to echo Surfguy's comments here. Great stuff, so glad to see everyone working together to better this coin.

I'm going to be working hard this week on some additional research regarding registration, as I'm now of the opinion we should speed that process to conclusion ASAP. I'll also be doing some behind the scenes work with current (and potentially future) investors.

I'll have to apologize in advance to anyone I'm slow on the reply with over IRC, there will be some periods where I'm logged in but away from the computer today and tomorrow.

all the best,

Chris

I would like to propose...again...that we are just spinning our wheels on these issues until we get someone (best choice of course being our Chief Technology Officer, Mindfox) to chime in on the specifics of each proposal.  

For instance, if someone were to say, hey I know this dev, here is his CV...he can do #4...would take about 10 days and cost 250,000 WC, or I know an Android App Dev, he will make an app that will do this and that, would take 30 days and cost 1 Mil WC.  That is something the community could get behind.

Please understand that these thoughts are not meant to be critical for critical sake, but rather for a deep desire to see WC thrive.  We have been tossing around ideas for a couple months now.  I would like to see the conversation evolve to a more productive and meaningful place.

Hello!

I write to you from LAX on my way to SFO for a job interview.  I've been so excited to read the great ideas being discussed and realize part of our battle is voting and funds. 

The Whitepaper laid out currently speaks of a way to add Members to the foundation via a merit based methodology.  There are names that are apart of our community that are easily recognizable due to their active involvement in discussions as well as those who have contributed content/media. 

The idea I am thinking outloud with you now, is one of a way for those without the time or skills to actively contribute but would like to be involved with the major decisions affecting WhiteCoin and The Foundation.  I'm not fully keen on continuing a voting model that says those with the most money get the most votes.  What I propose is a flat membership due.  This amount is up for debate, as well are the benefits of being a member.  It would be a way to not only raise funds for the active developments we are seeking, but a way to ensure a fair voting model and direct contact with the gears that make WhiteCoins clock tick.

With the creation of a true membership, more progress will be more easily be found through a distributed multinational pool of resources.  I want it to be inclusive as possible. 

Let me know your thoughts on this.  I think this could play a direct role in our developments currently on the table, and will assist in future developments as well.

Best Wishes,
The Surfguy72
David

2 and 3, 1 if it is easy to integrate.

My votes: 2 and 4

Privacy, reducing time confirmation, wallet android.
Also I think we should go for parts and not ask too many things together to turn this into too big a project to comply within a reasonable time. Weather in cryptography is money and I think it would be good first upgrade as soon as possible to give a dramatic effect and show the community and potential investors who are doing things. Once the first installment back to discuss improvements we want.

I agree with you on that point. However unless the majority agree to a fork like this it can never proceed anyway. So really it always has to be a majority decision it can never just take place without overall community development. In this case i think a swift 30M pot held by escrows seems the fastest way to get some things done.

Of course let's try the donations way first.

Could we please consider adding wallet trading or at a minimum placing exchange data into the wallet. This would be lower on the list if it make it and also we need to put mobile wallet. Might need two list as you started before. Phase I and Phase II.

2, 4 and 5