Not sure I'm getting your point. If you have an antidote, use it. If you wanted to come across as "nice", you utterly failed by using words like "rape".
You seem to be upset that someone doesn't subscribe to your long term holding ideology, but you will not gain any supporters by spamming this thread and certainly will not solve the problem this way. Talk to Terk in private if you have any technical issues to talk about, or just focus on making your coin more resistant to switching pools.
If not CM then another pool will come and do the same thing, so you might as well work on a solution rather than blame.
How's it feel to be Terk's mouthpiece? You seem to fight blindly for him. Does he pay you much for the effort? I'm just wondering why you don't let him speak for himself.
The fact that LTEX uses the word rape doesn't change the tone of the conversation. Your point is moot. CM does in fact rape the coin, and it's community of their time and money. Regardless of whether the underlying issue is the algorithm or not, CM is raping NLG. If 50% of the mined Bitcoin or Litecoin were sold in a day, what do you think the community would say? If they faced 1 hour delays at the hand of a single pool, what would the community do?
Secondly, where's the spam? Questions are being asked and Terk's lackeys are fielding them, not Terk himself. People want answers, and they want them addressed publicly by Terk, not you.
I would love to see the reasoning behind continuing to manipulate the NLG algorithm, even though developers and the community were trying to work with him in a civil manner when the problem was identified. At this point one could only think that it is because Terk takes pleasure in doing so. If that's not the case, then let him publicly state it. I personally don't care to hear it from anyone but him. When I spoke with him originally in PM, he seemed cordial. He agreed to work with the community and reduce the hashrate he pointed at NLG, and then 2 weeks later he continued. If he is a man of his word, he would be honorable and live up to his agreements. If he can't keep his word about this situation, what does that say about the way he conducts business? How could any miner make a conscious decision to blind trust his word after that? It raises a lot of questions regarding his ethics.
So, Suchmoon, enough with your shilling. Let your master speak for himself.
-Fuse