i heard of this prom guy first through this drama but so far i have to say i like how the guy is actually putting funding money in altcoins. instead of just throwing your rig at everything and expecting everybody to work or free while you get rich. that mentality is the real problem in crypto.
Topic: [ANN][Blocknet] truly decentralized exchange | token ecosystem infrastructure - page 324. (Read 1103293 times)
November 03, 2014, 10:37:03 AM
November 03, 2014, 10:36:12 AM
Who was "." in this conversation?
To me it's clear that XC is the stronger coin. It's too bad about the dev talent that could have been added, but that's why the blockchain is here now
Also, they were gonna screw dark by joining forces with XC while there already was a merge deal on the table from dark
Quote
[10/9/2014 1:21:10 PM] .: the pro for SDC is that they get attached to a longer standing, reputable coin with a clear vision and very strong tech. They will get XC coins and XC inc shares. This is a type of double plus. What they lose though, is potential gain. It's much easier for SDC's 500k market cap to increase 5x in value than XC's 2.7m market cap to 5x
[10/9/2014 1:21:45 PM] .: The pro for XC is that it gains double the devs, double the community, (well this is pro for SDC too), but it gains ZK, instant transactions, html5, lite wallet, and possibly voip/video
[10/9/2014 1:22:19 PM] .: the cons for XC is that the community may feel that their XC's just became inflated
[10/9/2014 1:21:45 PM] .: The pro for XC is that it gains double the devs, double the community, (well this is pro for SDC too), but it gains ZK, instant transactions, html5, lite wallet, and possibly voip/video
[10/9/2014 1:22:19 PM] .: the cons for XC is that the community may feel that their XC's just became inflated
To me it's clear that XC is the stronger coin. It's too bad about the dev talent that could have been added, but that's why the blockchain is here now
Also, they were gonna screw dark by joining forces with XC while there already was a merge deal on the table from dark
November 03, 2014, 10:34:13 AM
Wouldn't the altcoin community be better served if the dev of SDC, just shut down his coin, and removed it from the exchanges? That way there wouldn't be anything to FUD about?
If SDC ever gets ready and it's legit, the dev should just restart the blockchain from the beginning with a fair start with a premine to himself perhaps to get rid of the whale group. If the dev feels the whale group is detrimental to the image and success of his coin that is. Or someone else can fork it and people can decide which one to follow.
November 03, 2014, 10:34:03 AM
One must consider all the motivations involved here as well. Whales play dirty using tactics from the securities market.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/poopandscoop.asp
November 03, 2014, 10:33:07 AM
I personally would rather not join forces with SDC. Their community is very toxic and there is a reason it is and it's because their devs are either as bad as the community is or they are simply muppets.
Either way, merging with them is VERY -ev for XC overall.
Either way, merging with them is VERY -ev for XC overall.
Yes I think you're right that this could be a risk.
On the other hand I respect Ryno and other members of the SDC team, and I've enjoyed talking with them.
November 03, 2014, 10:32:12 AM
Apologies for deleting your post mig5000.
It contained barrabas's post.
Also I think it's best to drop that particular thread of the conversation.
It contained barrabas's post.
Also I think it's best to drop that particular thread of the conversation.
November 03, 2014, 10:31:39 AM
I personally would rather not join forces with SDC. Their community is very toxic and there is a reason it is and it's because their devs are either as bad as the community is or they are simply muppets.
Either way, merging with them is VERY -ev for XC overall.
Either way, merging with them is VERY -ev for XC overall.
November 03, 2014, 10:27:56 AM
Barrabas, you're no longer welcome here.
Go and paste your deleted comment in a FUD thread.
It's where it belongs.
Go and paste your deleted comment in a FUD thread.
It's where it belongs.
November 03, 2014, 10:26:56 AM
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here
https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
about why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too!
I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?
Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened
Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason?
As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them.
If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet.
On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things:
- that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
Hmm, after all those discussions I'd be very surprised if SDC dev just blindly believed the SDC whales without verifying everything. Obviously you know more about the ins-and-outs of the whole debacle but my guess is they threatened to dump their coins if they didn't get their way. A collaboration with XC would've limited their ability to manipulate the price of SDC to pump it.
These pump-and-dump groups are killing crypto. Combining the talents of both teams all pulling towards the same goal would've been exciting. Oh well. I still have every faith that Dan will bring XC to the top.
Yes I agree
Also, that entire conversation completely legitimizes XC and it's tech. It's an incredible piece of information.
Thanks for sharing this guys. I for one would have been thrilled to expand with SDC tech, but now I'm not so sure anymore. It would mean merging communities as well, and they don't seem to match
btw, what where those new options?
Quote
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
We haven't formally offered a merge a second time.
On the other hand I'm not aware that the offer was ever retracted.
And its benefit is still apparent.
At the moment its greatest appeal (personally) is that it would flout the deceitful intentions of the SDC trolls. And they would, naturally, be completely ostracised from the SDC/XC communities henceforth.
Just a thought though... there's no actual move toward a merge at this point.
November 03, 2014, 10:26:40 AM
Dan please stop entertaining iconic's expert puppets (aka barrabas). If there is trash bigger than Mr.Boh it's pretty much them.
November 03, 2014, 10:23:12 AM
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here
https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
about why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too!
I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?
Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened
Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason?
As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them.
If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet.
On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things:
- that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
Hmm, after all those discussions I'd be very surprised if SDC dev just blindly believed the SDC whales without verifying everything. Obviously you know more about the ins-and-outs of the whole debacle but my guess is they threatened to dump their coins if they didn't get their way. A collaboration with XC would've limited their ability to manipulate the price of SDC to pump it.
These pump-and-dump groups are killing crypto. Combining the talents of both teams all pulling towards the same goal would've been exciting. Oh well. I still have every faith that Dan will bring XC to the top.
Yes I agree
Also, that entire conversation completely legitimizes XC and it's tech. It's an incredible piece of information.
Thanks for sharing this guys. I for one would have been thrilled to expand with SDC tech, but now I'm not so sure anymore. It would mean merging communities as well, and they don't seem to match
btw, what where those new options?
Quote
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
November 03, 2014, 10:21:07 AM
Nice getting all those conversations out in the open for transparency, since it came to this point.
Don't be stupid enough to dump ur block to the pumpers wallet, we don't want it to become a new SDC
Don't be stupid enough to dump ur block to the pumpers wallet, we don't want it to become a new SDC
November 03, 2014, 10:20:18 AM
This - https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
I gotta say that I'm very impressed with that conversation.
Those greedy low life "pumpers" destroyed what was a very potent idea of merging strong tech into one big project and taking this to the next level.
Have a good day
I gotta say that I'm very impressed with that conversation.
Those greedy low life "pumpers" destroyed what was a very potent idea of merging strong tech into one big project and taking this to the next level.
Have a good day
this, the conversation was private but the commitment to monetising the node and all visions by Dan was articulated exactly the same like in public. also it was mentioned that communities would have had to agree. whatever , guess its off the table. shame
November 03, 2014, 10:18:13 AM
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here
https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
about why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too!
I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?
Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened
Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason?
As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them.
If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet.
On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things:
- that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
Hmm, after all those discussions I'd be very surprised if SDC dev just blindly believed the SDC whales without verifying everything. Obviously you know more about the ins-and-outs of the whole debacle but my guess is they threatened to dump their coins if they didn't get their way. A collaboration with XC would've limited their ability to manipulate the price of SDC to pump it.
These pump-and-dump groups are killing crypto. Combining the talents of both teams all pulling towards the same goal would've been exciting. Oh well. I still have every faith that Dan will bring XC to the top.
November 03, 2014, 10:13:01 AM
Now listing BLOCK on Cryptonator https://www.cryptonator.com/rates/BLOCK-BTC
November 03, 2014, 10:08:52 AM
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here
https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
about why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too!
I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?
Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened
Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason?
As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them.
If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet.
On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things:
- that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags
- that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
November 03, 2014, 10:07:36 AM
This - https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
I gotta say that I'm very impressed with that conversation.
Those greedy low life "pumpers" destroyed what was a very potent idea of merging strong tech into one big project and taking this to the next level.
Have a good day
I gotta say that I'm very impressed with that conversation.
Those greedy low life "pumpers" destroyed what was a very potent idea of merging strong tech into one big project and taking this to the next level.
Have a good day
November 03, 2014, 10:04:11 AM
We're never going to know just how involved Dan was in HAL, so we can leave it at that and let people make their own judgement on whether someone selling themselves as "the defacto standard of legitimacy" was acting ethically.
My point is, let people make their own judgement on Blocknet and about what it can bring to crypto in the future as potential is huge
I hope you understand it is all a try to stop it before it started...
When i see something wrong in BlockNet development i will let you know at once...for now we have nothing to complain about
November 03, 2014, 10:01:06 AM
Wouldn't the altcoin community be better served if the dev of SDC, just shut down his coin, and removed it from the exchanges? That way there wouldn't be anything to FUD about?
November 03, 2014, 10:00:13 AM
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here
https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6d
about why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too!
I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?
Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened
Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason?
Jump to: