since I spend over an hour reading, I would like first to say that I'm a plain man, not super smart, I do not transform during full moon, I just do what I was hired to do: implement my idea.
Now, regarding some of the technical concerns expressed are valid, but I would love to see the real person behind them.
Since I did not hide using a different nick, why would you?
Regarding anonymity, I would like someone to define the term to me.
Is it to make the addresses in a transaction invisible or prove that all addresses come from the same wallet/coin holder?
As I said many times, personally I do not trust my coins being in another wallet/master node/call it how you like, to forward my coins. Besides, even if you use a mixer, aren't the coins going to the same address?
Isn't the "taint analysis" going to reveal the coins that an address had, even for a single instance?
You mix the source and you reveal the destination. Or perhaps I didn't read it well.
Also, regarding the ability to learn the IP from a wallet that is not connectable can't be completely accurate. Just remember that transaction messages are re-broadcasted by wallets. Connectable or not.
So, as I mentioned in one of my posts, there are many different ideas and implementation and I respect everyone for the hard work and effort they put in order to make it (or made it) happen.
Also, all ideas in early stage have plenty of room for expansion.
I strongly believe that if those who go through the effort to go through technical analysis (which means that they are skilled either in coding or in googling - I would like to believe the first) can offer more than just "stay away from this coin - the dev is a scammer".
I don't think you're a scammer, but I also don't see a workable plan for anonymity here. What do you have in mind for it?
The CRYPT original whitepaper provide no advantage, so I assume you're working on a new plan. What is it?