Topic: [ANN][FLEX] Flexiblecoin |New Block Reward Structure|Bittrex, Cryptsy (Read 95164 times)

I would say extremely dead. 

Mining pool and exchange ?

i see this very dead

[PRE-ANN] [CIN] Cinder

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-cin-cinder-849939

See you there!

The Cinder Wallets will be available Saturday. The FlexibleCoin Wallet should not be used after midnight on Friday PST. Details coming soon.

We'll have a release date for the Cinder Wallets by noon PST on Thursday.

I thinkit would be wise of me to remove all my sell orders under 30 sat

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/CinderCoin
Lead Developer: https://twitter.com/JasonCatalyst

Thanks for the feedback guys =)

I'm also consulting with a more experienced dev to significantly, but safely lower both the stake time and the block time. We absolutely need a super-fast coin to tackle micro-payments and point of sale (market, street, and cart vendors). Future projects will likely include a web wallet with API for online merchants to easily accept Cinder, smartphone wallets and apps for transaction processing at point of sale, a Cinder/USD pairing, and integration into both Earth Assembly (a social network with marketplaces for goods and services) and Thorns of War (a browser-based RPG and World Sim)... both of which are largely finished and created by myself. Those websites will provide income for continued development as well as provide guaranteed adoption for Cinder.

Earth Assembly:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.397325503714730.1073741831.104191973028086&type=3

Thorns of War:
https://www.facebook.com/towrpg

Eventually I'd like to focus on adoption by outdoor vendors in such places as Spain, Greece, India, and third world countries. Then we invade first world farmer's markets, fairs, and food carts.

Me too I bought 150000 for now at 10. 

Good stuff   +1

I like the direction this is going.  I believe a min transaction size is necessary to deter abuse on the network - what that size is, I don't know. 

Ok, I've rethought this a bit, and come up with something that may sound a bit radical, but let me explain:

NO transaction fee.
10% interest for 2014.
06% interest for 2015.
04% interest for 2016.
03% interest for 2017.
02% interest for 2018.
01% interest for 2019.
00% interest for 2020 and beyond.

Q: Why would anyone keep their wallet online if there's no reward?

A: 1) Currently there's no reward for it anyway. After a prolonged period of being offline you still get your interest when you connect.
    2) With no interest for staked coins, exchanges, websites, merchants, etc. are free to stake their customers' deposits and help to secure the network.
    3) Large holders will also have a vested interest in keeping their staked coins connected so they can maintain a share of the stake weight and thus protect their interests.

With 0% interest we've got ourselves the first truly finite supply of currency. There will never be any more or less. Adoption will cause the value to rise without being weighed down by a constant supply of new coins. Early investors will be attracted by an initial interest rate of 10% and that investment will slowly be replaced over 5 years by adoption. The little guys (the poor) will have a truly free payment network provided by those who make money from their deposits. This seems very egalitarian to me, unlike the system of paying people for being richer.

Issues:
1) I think the transaction fee prevents spam attacks on the network. Could a minimum transaction size solve this?

A second permanent node is online in the Netherlands:

addnode=128.199.57.33

You can place that line in your .conf file as described here:

So what's your projected transaction cost if you used a 0% reward model?   Also, I thought you needed people to keep wallets open to ensure health of the network and participate in confirmations.  Speed of transaction is important, I don't want to be sitting for 20 mins waiting for my confirmations to go through.  Look at Pinkcoin,  you move coins, it requires 6 confirmations that happen really really quick. 

I don't know the answer to this but would increasing the amount of supernodes, reduce the need for people to have their wallets open confirming transactions?

The problem is that, as I understand it, you aren't rewarded for keeping your wallet open, connected, and processing transactions. You're rewarded simply for owning coins. This is the problem I see with the way staking works. Here are some notes I've been working on... (work in progress)...

Proposal #1
This one would be aimed towards rewarding those who keep their wallets online. With zero inflation from 0% stake interest, all "mining" or "staking" rewards would come from transaction fees payed to those who are actually connected to the network and processing transactions. I think it would offer the strongest network, but I'd also be concerned about rewarding transactions to participants based on stake weight, given that it merely rewards the wealthy for being wealthy and could cause ever-increasing centralization and concentration of wealth. Shouldn't the transactions be rewarded to those offering the most network participation, regardless of how many coins they hold? Is it possible to calculate a "transaction speed" rating similar to a miner's "hash rate"?

On the down side, a higher transaction fee could make it less suitable for micro-payments in online markets and games. Online markets would most likely require deposits, while offline markets might prefer gift cards to instant payments of Cinder as they avoid transaction fees. On the plus side, this could slow the growth of the blockchain by encouraging off-chain transactions.

I think that proposal #1 rewards early investors for the critical first few years, but then slowly shifts those rewards towards transaction fees and network participation.

Proposal #2
Still thinking about this one. 3% would most likely bring about 2% inflation. That would provide an ever-increasing money supply, rewarded to those holding the most wealth, without providing any real benefit to the network.

Proposal #3
So long as fewer than 100% of coins are staked, whoever is staking their coins is beating inflation and thereby profiting from stake interest. It would promote saving, but there's no real incentive to remain connected to the network and participate in transaction processing. You get your interest whether you're connected or not. What's the point in rewarding the wealthy just for being wealthy when there's no return on that investment in the form of guaranteed network participation?

Here's a few thought,
I would say proposal 2 seems the most attractive.  There are 130M coins total.  We don't need any high inflation due to large vol of coins but we do need to provide some incentive to reward existing and new investors during this relaunch phase.  With a 0% inflation, I feel nobody will want to keep their wallets open and it will be tough to move coins. 

Been trying to buy more since 6 sats and the price just keeps drifting slowly up away from me. I guess that's a good thing =)

I had the idea with Mythril to raise the transaction fee and change the interest to 0%. The purpose was to reward only those who kept their wallets online to process transactions, rather than just anyone with coins. However, since I'm not starting this coin from scratch I don't want to be overly disruptive to investors. I'd like to get the inflation rate below 3% per year and I think 5% interest would achieve that.

Proposal #1:
10% interest for the remainder of the year.
5% interest for 2015.
4% interest for 2016.
3% interest for 2017.
2% interest for 2018.
1% interest for 2019.
0% interest in 2020 and beyond.

Proposal #2:
10% interest for November.
5% interest in December.
3% interest in 2015 and beyond.

Proposal #3:
10% interest until 11/15/14
5% interest after that.

Thoughts?

One primary goal is to implement the coin into browser-based RPGs (including my own). I was going to call it Mythril but, as techlover pointed out, it's not a very suitable name for other purposes. He's still going to be working on Flexible Science, plus I want to look into marketing the coin to outdoor vendors. Perhaps we'll get a dragon mascot named Cinder... because dragons love treasure =D

It seemed like a happy medium between a fantasy-oriented branding and a general purpose one. And... I just like the word.

A new logo is very nice.
Why Cinder?

REBRAND

We'll be rebranding FlexibleCoin [FLEX] as Cinder [CIN].

For Twitter updates please follow us here: https://twitter.com/CinderCoin