This is worth reposting here as it gives a take from the inner circles of dash dev team etc at a point in the past and the issues that made this supposed dev leave the dash project altogether:
There's no ideology in something that nobody uses. The ideology's in the design, not the name. Vertoe is justified in leaving over not being consulted but less so over 'ideology'.
It's not a rock song that's being built here it's electronic money.
The name can easily be compromised without any loss of principle but the functionality can't. So Evan has got his priorities right in that regard.
no.
i left because i disagree darkcoin or however it will be called next year is not a decentralized entity. it never was but i ignored it as long as darkcoin was following the same path i was following. the path to total financial privacy. and thats why i am so upset about how this currency is lead by a single person. darkcoin is like an old conservative company with strong hierarchical comamnd structures and a single person on the top of the pyramid. evan duffield. the rebranding using a detergent name was just a step forward in creating something like apple or paypal. fuck this i tell you. what we need is a trustless, decentralized and anonymous currency. darkcoin is not decentralized as it still relies on a single person. and this reaches deep into the code base.
the core devs were just a bunch of volunteers exploited for the big thing. the extended darkcoin team was the same with even a lower place to sit on that pyramid. and what was the darkcoin foundation again? right, something to reserve some rights on some names and collect money. who nominated and voted for the foundation board? who does even know who are these guys? how did we learn about the foundation? from local news papers! the team listings kept counting names of people nobody ever noticed before. and they never committed anything visible to the community or the repository. and i was spending 25 hours a day monitory everything that happened in the darkcoin community for more than a year. the things going on here are fishy, intransparent and rely on a single entity.
i will get out and and will contribute to something decentralized and anonymous. i always hoped darkcoin could fill that void. i cant blame anyone to stay with this project. you are probably investors trying to win a gold donkey. or you are simply trying to exploit every possible vector of profit in the coins space. whatever. you are not here because darkcoin is something it claims to be.
if you disagree with my statement above, i dont care, but answer that simple question: what if evan duffield suddenly announces he quits the project tomorrow morning?
good luck
So yes there is ideology behind this coin : privacy, liberty, freedom, try to make the world less directed by "power" and more with the heart...
I hope that changing the name will not make the ideology behind it change too, otherwhise it will failed.
I hope that changing the name will not make the ideology behind it change too, otherwhise it will failed.
There's no ideology in something that nobody uses. The ideology's in the design, not the name. Vertoe is justified in leaving over not being consulted but less so over 'ideology'.
It's not a rock song that's being built here it's electronic money.
The name can easily be compromised without any loss of principle but the functionality can't. So Evan has got his priorities right in that regard.
no.
i left because i disagree darkcoin or however it will be called next year is not a decentralized entity. it never was but i ignored it as long as darkcoin was following the same path i was following. the path to total financial privacy. and thats why i am so upset about how this currency is lead by a single person. darkcoin is like an old conservative company with strong hierarchical comamnd structures and a single person on the top of the pyramid. evan duffield. the rebranding using a detergent name was just a step forward in creating something like apple or paypal. fuck this i tell you. what we need is a trustless, decentralized and anonymous currency. darkcoin is not decentralized as it still relies on a single person. and this reaches deep into the code base.
the core devs were just a bunch of volunteers exploited for the big thing. the extended darkcoin team was the same with even a lower place to sit on that pyramid. and what was the darkcoin foundation again? right, something to reserve some rights on some names and collect money. who nominated and voted for the foundation board? who does even know who are these guys? how did we learn about the foundation? from local news papers! the team listings kept counting names of people nobody ever noticed before. and they never committed anything visible to the community or the repository. and i was spending 25 hours a day monitory everything that happened in the darkcoin community for more than a year. the things going on here are fishy, intransparent and rely on a single entity.
i will get out and and will contribute to something decentralized and anonymous. i always hoped darkcoin could fill that void. i cant blame anyone to stay with this project. you are probably investors trying to win a gold donkey. or you are simply trying to exploit every possible vector of profit in the coins space. whatever. you are not here because darkcoin is something it claims to be.
if you disagree with my statement above, i dont care, but answer that simple question: what if evan duffield suddenly announces he quits the project tomorrow morning?
good luck
This is so funny, vertoe went over to overtake cachecoin afterwards. Promised a lot and left without any statement after a month or somethig ^^ Better follow vertoe, true story
Me = NoCodeTalent :..(