Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6371. (Read 9724017 times)

iCash.

Internet cash. Simple. But only as a name for DarkSend. Leave darkcoin now it has been discussed to death.

Plus we get to wave the finger at Apple.

I think it was me that suggested the airdrop. Chinese whispers have taken hold of this topic.

I don't think we should airdrop into the existing coin. That was not the suggestion.

The proposition was that clones will pop-up once darskend is open sourced. The darkcoin brand still brings up discussion, which means some like it, some don't. If its happening now, it will happen in the future.  I'm more concerned about the darksend brand, but that has now been voted on, so unless there is a veto, that is now decided.

The notion was that a clone with a shitty neutral color and a friendly smiley face would take the limelight and become the acceptable face of anonymity, i.e. internet cash, without having done the hard work of Evan, the rest of the people that got darkcoin to where it is and the miners who invest in electricity at a loss.

Rather than let someone else benefit via cloning, the concept was to be prepared to launch a happy smiley face version of darkcoin when darksend was out, being marketed etc, and competing with zerocash, dark wallet and other zerocoin implementations.  

The second implementation was suggested to be in the wings announced and ready to go but with a big gap in time - 3 / 6 months or so depending on the time it takes clone coins to implement a viable darksend.

The airdrop was to give existing darkcoin holders a big stake in the happy smiley darkcoin v2 while retaining a stake in darkcoin which would have a market leading position in the areas that like it.

The result was to have the bitcoin / litecoin relationship; make launching a clone by others pointless; avoid the pump and dump clones; and to provide a mechanism to incentivise new investors into darkcoin right now with the option of an airdrop if a clone threatens to launch.

It would also act as a hedge against those that raise the concern that the 'dark connection' will put off main street because they are concerned about its use in the back street.

So Chinese whispers over.  If everyone wants the status quo then that's fine. The points were raised, discussed, voted upon. Lets move on.  We all have the option to invest in happy smiley clone coin if that comes.

EDIT - I'm two months late into darkcoin. I missed the first 48 hours. I have invested and hold a substantial amount of darkcoin and I mine a noticeable amount at a loss.

Those that gained a super stake at the start are lucky. Good for them. I just hope that they don't dump the coin into oblivion at the first opportunity. I think darkcoin can be a $1bn coin. Lets hope they wait until there is sufficient volume to not notice their dumping otherwise they and everyone else will lose out.

A 24 hour super mine would benefit me, but I'm against it. I'd prefer a clone back-up. That way the dumpers can dump, those with a longer-term view can have an insurance plan.

By all means do it. The block investigation showed the top wallet with 190k coins. But please post your link.

best name is taken:  anoncoin

I think this is trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist.

I'm an early adopter, I've been mining since launch (few hours after launch), and during the first 2 weeks I basically sold all the coins from the first 48 hours because at that time the coin didn't seem to have any future. I sold them at ridiculous prices, like 0.05 per 1k XCO, and I'm sure most people who mined during the first days did the same or dumped already, because for many days the coin didn't look like having any future, so after the coin went to exchange markets people dumped huge quantities for quick profit.

Most of the coins I'm holding now are from the 2nd - 3rd week until now, at that time it was easy to mine a few hundreds per day with enough hardware, it was fair and a personal decision to mine this coin or any other coin, I'm sure 99% of the addresses in the top rich list are from people who mined at that time and people who invested in this coin when it was 0.00005BTC per coin, no one should complain about this, it's the way it works, some people decide to risk and invest or mine a coin when it's worthless, hoping that after some time it gets some value.

Just to give you an idea of how it was 2 weeks after launch (I'm the one trying to sell):

http://gyazo.com/2f236bef06096dc66354cdac9435b42f

do u want me to post the link to the address in the blockchain explorer?

when people known your trick, you do "airdrop", haha, such a good dev.

YOU read wrong my dear

He will have the coins and the address. I see the confusion because he wrote "paid" instead of pays.

lol eduffield you have 2000000 DRK and dont even send 100 DRK to your contributors as bounties

wtf

Think you misread what he wrote, go and read it again.

Anyway

The first 24 hours of the coins existence keep causing us problems, an "airdrop" could be a solution to this. We could airdrop all holders (uniquely verified) with a equal portion of coin. This coin would come from a block in the future that paid 2 million+ coins to a specific address that I hold.

lol eduffield you have 2000000 DRK and dont even send 100 DRK to your contributors as bounties

wtf

To suddenly flood, or eventually flood coins into the Darkcoin economy, when we had a "covenant" as to what this coin's distribution was going to be, would be breaking a major trust that we can never recover from.  This is a huge no-no.  It can not be allowed to happen.  What's done is done, but increasing the supply after people have "bought" literally into this coin is going to cause such a loss of trust, I don't think Darkcoin will survive.

A sister coin would wipe out Darkcoin, especially if we did it. So it's not a good idea.

Other options are:

1.) Renaming the coin. It keeps coming up over and over, maybe we should really consider it. Everyone start coming up with names and I'll make a voting page to gauge if our user base even wants this.
2.) The first 24 hours of the coins existence keep causing us problems, an "airdrop" could be a solution to this. We could airdrop all holders (uniquely verified) with a equal portion of coin. This coin would come from a block in the future that paid 2.4million+ coins to a specific address that I hold. We could use some kind of verification system like mastercoin (http://mastercoin-faucet.com/github-intro)
The airdrop would be a month or so into the future, so it would give users time to buy coins and become holders creating some demand. Also, we'd have a much larger market cap and the argument about the first 24 hours would become invalid.


As always, we listen to the community. If enough people complain, we'll do something...

Who else is up for drafting/proofreading/releasing press notes?
We need to get the ball rolling.