Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin" - page 253. (Read 1151252 times)

I think because there isn't overwhelming support for any particular course of action.

There seem to be quite a few people who think it would be wrong to change the existing rules at all - after all, "you already own 4.6 free CLAMs". How can we even have a vote when the people who didn't hear about the magic of free CLAMs yet won't have a chance of voting? See smooth's post for a good example of such.

And then there are a lot of people who are sick of this digger who "already owns 500,000 free CLAMs" and is slowly and deliberately dumping them on the market.

How do you reconcile the wishes of those two groups? We can have a vote and do whatever the majority of stakers decides, but that way you risk alienating the other group. And by doing nothing you risk alienating the group who wants you to "do something".

Smooth's post, linked above, proposed making a 2nd coin for the group who want a different set of rules. What is your objection to doing that? You say you don't want to see a "split", but is it a split, and more than CLAM was a "split" of BTC?


Me too, and I have been trying for a few months now to find a way for that to happen. I was hopeful that we could at least agree to put it to an on-chain vote and go with the majority, but apparently even that isn't acceptable to some - and I can see their point.

Yes this is also what I prefer. If the diggers insist to proceed then he will need to pay a lot more to existing stakers/holders.

The significant higher fee is actually an idea i like.

It is possible to make the client counting the amount of CLAMS digged in the past 24 hours. If it exceeds certain limit then trigger DoS in mempool to reject newer digs, or give the diggers an option to proceed with a significantly higher tx fee.

Why are you here?  You contribute nothing but bad spelling and hyperbole.

They created the problem and are now "working it" so that you and the others on this ponzi-go-round will react in such a way so that their solution becomes palattable.

The powers that be/ruling elite have been playing this game for centuries.

I'll give you guys a few more hours... maybe a day.. to see through dooglus' BS.

Or sooner if/when Cryptsy's demise snowballs and envelopes Poloniex and it's inhouse shitcoins.

edit

CRYPTSY stopping withdraw locking accounts without notifying users! Class Action
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cryptsy-stopping-withdraw-locking-accounts-without-notifying-users-class-action-1173703

Wait so Calm pussies are upset someone is claiming the clams from the 17M outstanding clams even though only 1-2 Mhave been dugged or staked, and upset they clams are losing value.

Now they want a Doogcoin that probably should be pegged to Bitcoin so JD can endure.

So back 200 pages and look at what people told you bunch of clamscammers.

Ended up right up in the sclammer developers wheelhouse.

You would just receive a proportional amount of the new coin. No need to trade, though of course you could always trade one coin for the other with an exchange or OTC trade.

I'm all for things staying the same. Market sentiment is dubious and people seem to have unsewn themselves from inside their couches just for this reason. Nothing is wrong, and we all signed up for the same distribution. Without the distribution, it's just another token. Aspirations always win, in due time.

It wasnt enough that you have a jew hat?

In this case it would be greatly helpful if you were a coder. Or even if you understood how PoS works, also helpful. Maybe you should try to understand the issue before you make suggestions like "its only code".
It was an unforeseen side effect of PoS. I could explain it to you in detail but it seems you really don't care for the logic anyways, you've made your conclusions.

Were not all perfect here at CLAM.  Mistakes happen.. we fix them, we try to learn from them..  and move on.

Maybe it is possible to have a provable fair onchain lottery with the bitcoin scripting system. I, nor any one else looking at the problem was able to figure out how.

We also had the issue of needing to move quick. Once a flaw in something like this is found you can't wait around while you figure out a solution to a problem that arguable isn't even solvable within the context of the bitcoin script system.

It was being abused. The only logical recourse was to remove it.

   Guess you aren't really following the discussion.  I think the Lol was supposed to mean "I'm only kidding". 

But I like a good conspiracy theory...  getting the tin foil hat ready.. .   

mm... Theres nothing like the fresh smell of ponzi pushers in the morning... TAKE A DEEP BREATH PEEPS ! lol

All hail the great Cryptofiat Bank of Doog !

I do not need to be a coder to know that its only code !

Those "in the know" used the same excuse 3 years ago when they duped some/most of the community into thinking that scrypt asics were an impossibility.

Would you like to try again ?

this is the moment im doubling price of uid 18 to 1.6 btc LOL.
Edit: i believe clam should stay as it is, clam was designed in a way and it shouldnt be changed just because people is afraid, there is another 14m of awesome coins or whatever amount it is, i think its a nice rollercoaster we would waste.

   I believe he stated it would be a 1 for 1 swap for all clams not in the original distribution blocks, Which means if your clams have already been dug, you would get 1 doogcoin per. 

   This is all just hypothesis at this point.  He is just throwing out ideas for consideration. 

Not for everyone of course. Lol. Only if your JD user ID is less than 50000. Or invested amount exceeds 4K clams. Anyway you will have a time (1-2 days) to buy some more clams and get your chance to jump on that train.

If you do that will u give investors choice to trade their clam for same amount moneysupply of doogcoin?

Dooglus thanks again for the reply, I will cut a lot mine in order to be brief. The presence of a big and slow digger seems to give headaches to a lot of CLAM holders.

What about capping/limiting the amount of CLAMs which can be digged daily (example: no more than 200 CLAMS per day)? The available limits can be given randomly to diggers who wants them. In this way we are still 'fair' towards prospective diggers and at the same time we give a 'time advantage' to current holders which are, of course, more important than future unknown ones.

There was no fixing, the lottery was inherently broken and unfixable. 

Suggesting the reward was 1000 is misinformed. It was a max of 1000, and a min of .1, and the overwheming majority of blocks were .1 reward.  Doog posted the chart where inflation increased after the lottery was stopped, you can look back to the last page or two to see it.