On looking at my last post anew today, I find it a bit rambling and not as tight or focused as I'd like. Anyway, to move on to something productive along the lines I was trying to suggest...
...supposing I have the day off from my full-time job tomorrow (as I anticipate), I'm planning on forking the Peercoin code into a test coin that (after sufficient experimentation and alteration) might be something we could credibly or justifiably offer (after we work any bugs out or conceivably improve on or tweak) as a viable CROC 2.0. My current impression remains that a well-executed coin-swap (not to the test-coin but to an iteration ultimately derived from this) will be the most suitable and equitable approach for current CROC holders.
The test/makeshift coin will be a work-in-progress on Github as long as will be deemed necessary by the community-at-large. My tentative name for this (as it's not a serious coin/intended-object-of-speculation and would instead be a transitory and a community-manipulable thing) is "Cow-chip Thrower coin" [CCT]
. More details (and a link to the source) in all likelihood will be forthcoming tomorrow. I still like the nomenclature of "CROC-prime" for the test-coin (after it has undergone any and all trials-by-fire) as a sort of development name... although CrocodileCash would remain the actual name of the long-term CROC 2.0.
One issue I considered -- during some idle reflection today -- was that existing CROC holders should be able to port-over their addresses; or (if this isn't possible or even desirable) retain their position with the CROC that they have held. Again, I think the coin-swap model seems to be the most suitable formula for bringing this about (
).
I agree with Currypto that we can piggyback off the Peercoin code but adapt it to CROC. The parameters I think we want to keep for this animal include the following:
* 30-second block target,
* 55 million coins before POW ends (and I think we want to ensure it ends firmly... unlike a zombie coin such as Q2C that just keeps generating coins through some wishy-washy loophole or lack-of-rigor in the code),
* SHA-256d still for the POW (keeping it an ASIC coin... just because it's that particular kind of beast),
* securing the chain through hybridization with (simultaneous) POS and POW ... ... ... this is actually a point-of-difficulty/nebulousness for me personally because I don't claim to understand how the blocks are generated (I realize that CROC stakes like a top-of-the-food-chain reptile but I don't understand how a new block is generated exactly... do POS and POW compete or take turns or what? Any idea anyone???),
* keeping the transfer fee as (the peanuts amount of) 0.01 CROC -- [LTC and DOGE eat your hearts out!],
* start any enforced/strongly-recommended-transition at a pre-announced point in the blockchain (again, after we can be confident that the Peercoin-fork has the expected behavior/characteristics of CROC but is built upon the more evolved Peercoin codebase instead of Antibitcoin -- which hasn't seemed to have had a developer's or a development-team's eyes upon it for about two years).
* What have I overlooked? Your/any input is wanted here.
...supposing I have the day off from my full-time job tomorrow (as I anticipate), I'm planning on forking the Peercoin code into a test coin that (after sufficient experimentation and alteration) might be something we could credibly or justifiably offer (after we work any bugs out or conceivably improve on or tweak) as a viable CROC 2.0. My current impression remains that a well-executed coin-swap (not to the test-coin but to an iteration ultimately derived from this) will be the most suitable and equitable approach for current CROC holders.
The test/makeshift coin will be a work-in-progress on Github as long as will be deemed necessary by the community-at-large. My tentative name for this (as it's not a serious coin/intended-object-of-speculation and would instead be a transitory and a community-manipulable thing) is "Cow-chip Thrower coin" [CCT]
. More details (and a link to the source) in all likelihood will be forthcoming tomorrow. I still like the nomenclature of "CROC-prime" for the test-coin (after it has undergone any and all trials-by-fire) as a sort of development name... although CrocodileCash would remain the actual name of the long-term CROC 2.0.One issue I considered -- during some idle reflection today -- was that existing CROC holders should be able to port-over their addresses; or (if this isn't possible or even desirable) retain their position with the CROC that they have held. Again, I think the coin-swap model seems to be the most suitable formula for bringing this about (
).I agree with Currypto that we can piggyback off the Peercoin code but adapt it to CROC. The parameters I think we want to keep for this animal include the following:
* 30-second block target,
* 55 million coins before POW ends (and I think we want to ensure it ends firmly... unlike a zombie coin such as Q2C that just keeps generating coins through some wishy-washy loophole or lack-of-rigor in the code),
* SHA-256d still for the POW (keeping it an ASIC coin... just because it's that particular kind of beast),
* securing the chain through hybridization with (simultaneous) POS and POW ... ... ... this is actually a point-of-difficulty/nebulousness for me personally because I don't claim to understand how the blocks are generated (I realize that CROC stakes like a top-of-the-food-chain reptile but I don't understand how a new block is generated exactly... do POS and POW compete or take turns or what? Any idea anyone???),
* keeping the transfer fee as (the peanuts amount of) 0.01 CROC -- [LTC and DOGE eat your hearts out!],
* start any enforced/strongly-recommended-transition at a pre-announced point in the blockchain (again, after we can be confident that the Peercoin-fork has the expected behavior/characteristics of CROC but is built upon the more evolved Peercoin codebase instead of Antibitcoin -- which hasn't seemed to have had a developer's or a development-team's eyes upon it for about two years).
* What have I overlooked? Your/any input is wanted here.
I think it's great.
