Closed source at first, no question. Then after few months when DarkCoin has become de-facto anonymous transfers enabling currency release the source.
If people don't trust their whole wallet balance to the closed source plugin, they can have their main wallet running without the plugin, and xfer the amounts they want to transfer anonymously to the another wallet with the plugin.
Agree
Open Source or Closed Source?
Closed source until beta/release to protect the coin from clones while it is being developed. Clones are not bad, and it
can provide a legitimate competitive rivalry among developers, but I think doing it this early would be a mistake pragmatically due to greed and capitalistic manipulation.
After that, it must, must,
MUST be open source -- the community is for the most part somewhat more knowledgeable in cryptography and the need for anonymity in transactions, and you simply cannot have this if it is closed source. Anecdote: this is why Truecrypt is infinitely more popular than any other data encryption. No matter how good your intentions, no-one is going to trust a closed source client these days. No one even trusts "trustworthy" companies like Google with their data as they did all doe-eyed in 2008 with their (in)famous "do no evil" motto when they, too, simply bend to the will of their masters.
Again, I agree, but need to keep reading, LOL, I'm behind!