Why is digging a problem ? Isnt that what CLAM was all about ?
Just different perspectives in the community 
this is good. 
Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin" - page 264. (Read 1151252 times)
November 08, 2015, 05:29:35 PM
a: Leaving everything as it is.
this is good.
this is good. 
November 08, 2015, 04:10:39 PM
CLAM have today good price up. i hope reach up to 300K soon and 500K next.
November 08, 2015, 03:26:17 PM
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
This already exists. If you dig and stake, your CLAMs increase by about 4% per month currently. In about a year they are increased by 50%. By not digging you lose 1/3 of that value in a year. That seems quite sufficient to me. This rate will decrease over time, but then the supply effect of even large digs will also decrease as the total supply increases.
EDIT: previously stated that half of value was lost per year by not digging but correct number is 1/3 (150 if digging 100 and staking for a year vs 100 if waiting a year to dig).
November 08, 2015, 01:35:58 PM
Speaking of Directbet.
We've removed the ads off www.Clamcoin.org and added a list of all the gambling sites that take CLAM.
We've removed the ads off www.Clamcoin.org and added a list of all the gambling sites that take CLAM.
November 08, 2015, 11:43:41 AM
What is best online clam wallet? I just do not want to download on my PC.
Hi raaajlucky,
You can use DirectBet Playing Wallet.
You can move funds in and out of your playing wallet free of charge. We cover the miner fees !
All withdrawals are Instant.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.
All the Best,
Michelle
www.DirectBet.eu
November 08, 2015, 11:18:50 AM
I hope CLAM will rise up after these terrible days, i love this Alt because is still strong after the big BTC evaluation.
November 08, 2015, 10:59:36 AM
What is best online clam wallet? I just do not want to download on my PC.
Just-dice.com
and the most profitable way to dig your Clamcoins is to self affiliate and dig through Clamchecker.com.
Good luck!
November 08, 2015, 10:27:09 AM
What is best online clam wallet? I just do not want to download on my PC.
I use just-dice.com
Such is your opinion, and thank you for sharing it. So far, you and BayAreaCoins are strongly opposed to any changes. Understood. Based on lots of other feedback, others definitely feel differently about it. The 2 of you do not hold Veto decision-making powers here and that will continue to be true no matter how much BayAreaCoins huffs and puffs.
You still haven't answered what's terribly bad about a halvening in May 2016. People are ready to quit the coin because of this digger situation. It's time to find a compromise and make a community decision.
You are correct. I was merely offering my opinion; just as you are. I thought I was offering a compromise with option "f". There is no need IMO to take drastic action without cause. That's the problem with the "halvening". It was never conceived in any of the original code or proposals, nor is it even warranted. Established coins that make fundamental changes for greed-based purposes (or even purposes that could be perceived as such) tend to suffer a slow death soon after; that's history.
Why do you insist that any changes are completely greed-based? There's a big difference between greed and self-preservation. As you can see, there are already people ready to throw in the towel and the digger is only 30% done. For all we know, you and BAC are the diggers and your opinions are motivated by greed. I'm sure you'd love nothing more than to continue dumping on the entire community for the next 6 months like you've been doing since the coin was 10x the price it is now.
My opinion is the 2 year free CLAM distribution period can be seen as a huge success. It got lots of free CLAM into people's hands, and with a 6 months notice digs should be stopped at the 2 year mark and moved to Full POWS only, while keeping the existing generous stake rewards intact. That said, I think a May 2016 halvening is the fairest compromise. There's nothing "drastic" about announcing a halvening with >6 months notice.
Hoping to hear opinions from others, for or against.
November 08, 2015, 09:18:40 AM
What is best online clam wallet? I just do not want to download on my PC.
I use just-dice.com
Such is your opinion, and thank you for sharing it. So far, you and BayAreaCoins are strongly opposed to any changes. Understood. Based on lots of other feedback, others definitely feel differently about it. The 2 of you do not hold Veto decision-making powers here and that will continue to be true no matter how much BayAreaCoins huffs and puffs.
You still haven't answered what's terribly bad about a halvening in May 2016. People are ready to quit the coin because of this digger situation. It's time to find a compromise and make a community decision.
You are correct. I was merely offering my opinion; just as you are. I thought I was offering a compromise with option "f". There is no need IMO to take drastic action without cause. That's the problem with the "halvening". It was never conceived in any of the original code or proposals, nor is it even warranted. Established coins that make fundamental changes for greed-based purposes (or even purposes that could be perceived as such) tend to suffer a slow death soon after; that's history.
November 08, 2015, 08:45:16 AM
@dooglus
Why don't you make your own coin under NXT monetary system http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/ for example and focus on Just-Dice. Like Nautiluscoin https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/naut-nautiluscoin-to-nxt-based-nautilus-redemption-process-1182317 or BARR https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-barr-the-only-cryptocurrency-where-no-ones-ever-lost-money-1219460
For start you can use all CLAMs in Just-Dice. After that you can burn all of them and leave the rest of CLAMs to true believers.
Most of us are here because of Just-Dice anyway.
Why don't you make your own coin under NXT monetary system http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/ for example and focus on Just-Dice. Like Nautiluscoin https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/naut-nautiluscoin-to-nxt-based-nautilus-redemption-process-1182317 or BARR https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-barr-the-only-cryptocurrency-where-no-ones-ever-lost-money-1219460
For start you can use all CLAMs in Just-Dice. After that you can burn all of them and leave the rest of CLAMs to true believers.
Most of us are here because of Just-Dice anyway.
November 08, 2015, 08:19:48 AM
So you'll be voting for No Change then. That's your prerogative. Others may feel differently.
I don't get what's so bad about a halvening at the 2 year mark six months from now.. Especially when there are security risks involved. I don't believe there is any risk of loss of reputation for taking reasonable measures to protect the coin.
No, I'll be voting for no change unless security risks become security threats. We're not there yet, and there's no guarantee that we'll ever be. IMO protecting the coin is paramount, but this does not include its value. We owe it to the coin to let the market determine that aspect. CLAM is not just another shitcoin; let us not treat it as such.
Such is your opinion, and thank you for sharing it. So far, you and BayAreaCoins are strongly opposed to any changes. Understood. Based on lots of other feedback, others definitely feel differently about it. The 2 of you do not hold Veto decision-making powers here and that will continue to be true no matter how much BayAreaCoins huffs and puffs.
You still haven't answered what's terribly bad about a halvening in May 2016. People are ready to quit the coin because of this digger situation. It's time to find a compromise and make a community decision.
November 08, 2015, 07:30:11 AM
People dont want buy so long digger still digging. He destroys the clam with use so long time.
Maybe that's the whole point. It could be someone who hates altcoins in general or CLAM in particular.
You have talk to him? I think if people will offer him a 300-400 btc wall on polo maybe he will take it.
November 08, 2015, 05:02:11 AM
What is best online clam wallet? I just do not want to download on my PC.
November 08, 2015, 03:24:25 AM
So you'll be voting for No Change then. That's your prerogative. Others may feel differently.
I don't get what's so bad about a halvening at the 2 year mark six months from now.. Especially when there are security risks involved. I don't believe there is any risk of loss of reputation for taking reasonable measures to protect the coin.
No, I'll be voting for no change unless security risks become security threats. We're not there yet, and there's no guarantee that we'll ever be. IMO protecting the coin is paramount, but this does not include its value. We owe it to the coin to let the market determine that aspect. CLAM is not just another shitcoin; let us not treat it as such.
^
If we get plowed by a dig and security becomes an issue... then what has to be done has to be done IMO.
He gets heated at times. I find that engaging him while he's being like this tends to escalate things.0
I do need to work on getting so heated and thanks kindly for not engaging me.
It feels like trying to paint a picture and some asshole with a spray paint can tries to fuck it up because "they" think their shitty little can will be worth more for scrap metal than the paint.
(probably how "they" feel about me 
) 
November 08, 2015, 03:14:03 AM
Very weak dynamics in recent days makes me think about quitting, I must throw off coins
November 08, 2015, 03:04:24 AM
So you'll be voting for No Change then. That's your prerogative. Others may feel differently.
I don't get what's so bad about a halvening at the 2 year mark six months from now.. Especially when there are security risks involved. I don't believe there is any risk of loss of reputation for taking reasonable measures to protect the coin.
No, I'll be voting for no change unless security risks become security threats. We're not there yet, and there's no guarantee that we'll ever be. IMO protecting the coin is paramount, but this does not include its value. We owe it to the coin to let the market determine that aspect. CLAM is not just another shitcoin; let us not treat it as such.
November 08, 2015, 02:24:49 AM
I guess it goes something like this:
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
f. While 51% attack is not a problem do "a"
If 51% attack becomes a problem do "d" if it is ready, or else do "e" until it is ready
He gets heated at times. I find that engaging him while he's being like this tends to escalate things.0
In this case I understand his frustration, and I share his passion. The market effects of this dig are unfortunate, but we all know the risks of investing. I remember discussing the big digger topic long before I ever heard of this digger. A free market will correct itself naturally given time. I think it is very important that we remember why we are doing this: More than financial gain; we are trying replace an inherently flawed system with a better one -- a more just one. I think the point becomes moot if we do not hold ourselves to a higher standard than those we seek to usurp. I am a big fan of profit, but tainting our community's reputation is too high a cost for it IMO. We have to do what's best for CLAM.
So you'll be voting for No Change then. That's your prerogative. Others may feel differently.
I don't get what's so bad about a halvening at the 2 year mark six months from now.. Especially when there are security risks involved. I don't believe there is any risk of loss of reputation for taking reasonable measures to protect the coin.
November 08, 2015, 02:12:24 AM
I guess it goes something like this:
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
f. While 51% attack is not a problem do "a"
If 51% attack becomes a problem do "d" if it is ready, or else do "e" until it is ready
He gets heated at times. I find that engaging him while he's being like this tends to escalate things.0
In this case I understand his frustration, and I share his passion. The market effects of this dig are unfortunate, but we all know the risks of investing. I remember discussing the big digger topic long before I ever heard of this digger. A free market will correct itself naturally given time. I think it is very important that we remember why we are doing this: More than financial gain; we are trying replace an inherently flawed system with a better one -- a more just one. I think the point becomes moot if we do not hold ourselves to a higher standard than those we seek to usurp. I am a big fan of profit, but tainting our community's reputation is too high a cost for it IMO. We have to do what's best for CLAM.
November 08, 2015, 01:51:51 AM
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
They'd need to be specified in detail.
2. Every time anyone stakes a block, they vote for their favourite proposal(s). In the CLAMspeech, or coinbase input, or wherever it fits.
3. As soon as any proposal has more than X% support when looking over the last Y% of blocks, that proposal is deemed to have been selected by the community. To avoid 2 similar proposals splitting the vote and making "tactical voting" a viable strategy, we could use instant-runoff_voting to decide the winner. It's unclear what X and Y should be. I guess 75% and "6 months worth" are reasonable starting points to consider.
As many others have said the CLAM distribution has done its job, now it needs to evolve in order to avoid the security risk of a single entity controlling a vast majority of the supply. and you'd still be giving 6 months of advance notice at this point. if the digger wants to dig them all at once, so be it.. at least there would be an end in sight.
I tend to agree, though I had to cringe at the "single entity" bit... Then again, it doesn't matter whether I agree. I shouldn't get a casting vote even though the coins are mostly in my physical control.
Lol dooglus, i should clarify and say a 'single malicious entity'
I can understand how ending all digging, even at a future date, would be considered too drastic.
I'd like to expand on Option C, what about digs halving in value every 2 years? The first Halvening would happen in May 2016, going from 4.6 to 2.3 CLAMS reward per address.
November 08, 2015, 01:27:03 AM
It seems this plan would require the digger to be completely oblivious to what's going on?
While it is quite possible that the current digger would insta-dig all his remaining wallets in the face of such a change, at least then we would know what we are looking at in terms of the total money supply. Without this change, we never know when the next massive digger will come along and add another million or two to the supply.
If it ever looked like his digging was going to be stopped, what's stopping him just digging everything at once? I guess this is mildly better than the current situation, as he'd be forced to show his entire hand but he could even likely start using his clams to vote "digging-allowed" and prevent an overwhelming majority consensus.
He'd have to dig up his CLAMs to use them to vote, and having done so it would presumably be in his own best interest to vote not to allow anyone else to dig at a later date.
This process could be completed without scorched-earthing the chain, re: orphans, etc.
It is essentially nothing more than voting - no reason to make it live on chain, unless there is benefit in making the transition period tumultuous.
It is essentially nothing more than voting - no reason to make it live on chain, unless there is benefit in making the transition period tumultuous.
Yes, of course. I wrote the post as it occurred to me, and arrived at the conclusion that voting works better than fighting on-chain by the end of it. I should have gone back and removed the talk of orphaning.
The only reasoning I can think to make such 'voting' via block consensus as opposed to wetware would be to edge in a restriction on claims prior to a final decision - which would be negligible, imho.
Wait, what do you mean about wetware? How do you imagine any such voting working? It can't just be a poll on JD, since there are coins staking elsewhere, and they should have their vote. Are you suggesting we should just like - talk about it? And reach a consensus? So I was thinking that voting using messages in the coinbase of new stakes would be the way forward. Or do you not agree that the people holding CLAM should get to vote?
That said, I think everyone accepts and understands that CLAM was created with the intention of applying consensus. This can manifest as users updating their client to new "official" versions, and hence applying new rules, or in the case of JD's commanding presence on the network, a forced fork.
I don't intend to use JD's presence to force anything. As I see it, people with coins on JD should get to decide how their coins vote, and I shouldn't get to decide how any coins other than my own vote.
I think there is value in a smooth, thought-out fork and update, as opposed to competition on chain. Though, competition on chain is likely to occur regardless with a large chain to some extent.
I agree, but I don't see it happening. You have said you're willing to go with what the community wants, but how do we gauge that?
I still think a re-alignment of the fee structure is the most logical change that would positively change the dynamics around this digging. This is also, unfortunately, a very complicated and involved change.
That's always your "go to" when the question of the digger comes up, but I don't think it addresses the problem at all does it? It looks like it could maybe address the issue, because it makes fees depend on the length of time an output has been stored on the chain, but (a) it only starts counting from when the fork is made, and so the distribution coins pay no more fee than anyone else's and (b) the fees are collected by the stakers, who could well be the digger himself.
I may have misunderstood the proposal though. Could you give as simple as possible an explanation of how the full complicated and involved change helps out with this particular issue we're facing? To restate the problem it is that we have a digger who has been steadily selling fresh CLAMs for over 2 months and can probably continue to do so for another year at the current rate. This steady sell pressure causes a steady decline in the market price of CLAMs and makes them undesirable to hold for anyone.
However, I believe the simplest, easiest and quickest to implement "solution" which maintains the original promises of the network AND has a redeemable benefit to the network is to simply require that "digs" are restricted to staking transactions. This restriction would add incentive to stake with the client, require diggers to "contribute" in the process of digging and add some predictability to the rate of "dig" inflation.
It would not remove dig inflation, or take away un-dug coins from users who have yet to claim.
Instead, it would rate-limit and add predictability to the process.
It would not remove dig inflation, or take away un-dug coins from users who have yet to claim.
Instead, it would rate-limit and add predictability to the process.
He's already digging very slowly. If he had to stake every output before spending it, he could do so easily at the rate he is currently digging. By insisting that distribution outputs are staked before being spent you are only penalising small holders - the guy who has 5 or 10 old addresses, digs them up, then finds that he can't spend anything until they stake. He's likely to walk away, "I knew it was too good to be true".
At the moment, a ~4.6 output of CLAM un-dug would take a great deal of time to stake.
To offset this, you would provide additional weight to "dig" outputs.
To offset this, you would provide additional weight to "dig" outputs.
If you make it possible for the small holder to stake in a reasonable time, you also make it possible for the big digger to continue flooding the market.
I don't think this proposed change works, and even if it was successful in slowing his dumping, that doesn't make any difference. He still ends up dumping his 500k into the market, it just takes him 5 years instead of 1 year.
I think this is a great idea as long as you give plenty of warning of end dig date. So doing it the way you suggest, could you make it so that all digs after the 2 year mark are invalid? I think 2 years is a very fair compromise to claim your free CLAM, especially considering the generous stake rewards.
I guess it goes something like this:
1. We come up with a list of proposals, for example:
a. leave everything as it is
b. disallow all digging
c. some kind of decay in value of undug CLAMs over time
d. CC's very complicated and involved change
e. CC's quick and simple change
They'd need to be specified in detail.
2. Every time anyone stakes a block, they vote for their favourite proposal(s). In the CLAMspeech, or coinbase input, or wherever it fits.
3. As soon as any proposal has more than X% support when looking over the last Y% of blocks, that proposal is deemed to have been selected by the community. To avoid 2 similar proposals splitting the vote and making "tactical voting" a viable strategy, we could use instant-runoff_voting to decide the winner. It's unclear what X and Y should be. I guess 75% and "6 months worth" are reasonable starting points to consider.
As many others have said the CLAM distribution has done its job, now it needs to evolve in order to avoid the security risk of a single entity controlling a vast majority of the supply. and you'd still be giving 6 months of advance notice at this point. if the digger wants to dig them all at once, so be it.. at least there would be an end in sight.
I tend to agree, though I had to cringe at the "single entity" bit... Then again, it doesn't matter whether I agree. I shouldn't get a casting vote even though the coins are mostly in my physical control.
BayAreaCoins, you sound unstable... are you the digger? The beauty of dooglus proposal is it involves the community..your vote is not any more special than someone else's 
He gets heated at times. I find that engaging him while he's being like this tends to escalate things.
Jump to: