Topic: [ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released - page 331. (Read 1356147 times)

Why does the price drop every single day ? is there any good news to pump the price up ? I bought my stash at 20k and it seems I have lost 40 % of my capital 

yup, how "bullshit" are my manipulation claims now? (aragoon I know you never said they were I was referring to someone else)

Bot the heck is going on? Can anyone exterminate these bots please? Swings are getting rediculus. 

Loot read my post 1-2 pages back lol I posted a pic of the huge payout I got

I enjoy reading these conversations, thanks for clearing everything up guys!

Jesus barabbas, you are setting back the timeline for all the VRC Devs... relax.

We had some pool issues over the past couple of weeks revolving around the DDoS attacks on the pool and the supernodes. I just manually paid out the discrepancy today. Congrats on the bulk VRC!
When we released the coin we originally stated an expected 1.5-2.5% interest per year. Even with a network stake weight of 30M, the interest still falls below 2.5% yearly interest. I'm not sure where you're getting your twice as big number from, but that's not possible. The most the interest rate could get to if everyone had a lot of coin age and staked at once is still below 3% interest, close to 2.5%.

soooooo you saying you got a big payout also ?

Not only it isn't changing the subject it is, actually, a nice aside for perhaps some would assume that the proceeds from the mining pool somewhat increase the total number of VRC. That would be a WRONG assumption since the proceeds of the mining pool are simply VRC that is bought in the open market -therefore taken from the exchanges deposits- and transferred to the miner's VRC wallets. It doesn't increase the total number of coins until (and through it) they start staking.

Well it isn't just that I "didn't understand...". It is more like we all are finding out that you really don't know what the wallet can do and that Doug, the wallet man, has a "loose" concept, to say the least, of what "too much bigger (a number)" actually is. And since I hope I have demonstrated the staggering nature of the difference in numbers, it is IMPLIED that it has an equally staggering influence in the number of coins being "mined" through staking.

This is very significant since it all seems -and I certainly hope to be 100% wrong in my assumption- to be so ahead of the "limit" of approximately 2.25% yearly maximum total interest that it's not funny at all. There will be time, very soon indeed, to address the repercussions of those hugely bigger numbers staking, so I won't anticipate anything hoping, indeed, to be somewhat as out of touch with the final interest as Dough is regarding the "too big a number" statement.

Not to change the conversation but did anyone else get a huge-ass payout from the mining pool - really huge

For the record. Total coins that exist are not in question here just the difference between network stake weight value and total coins currently in stake.

26.8M coins exist (26,811,507 right now to be exact). http://chainz.cryptoid.info/vrc has a realtime count of coins in the blockchain. There is no discrepency with the total coins in existence-- just that you didn't understand that network stake weight is not exactly the same as total coin count.

Well thank you Doug for finally getting my point AND doing something about it since, it is painfully obvious that the current numbers are, in fact, totally meaningless because, as I edited added to my previous post, the current given numbers could be in fact so staggeringly out of touch with the real ones that it could approximate or even surpass DOUBLE those real numbers.

I am not a mathematician, obviously, but my common sense tells me bundles about the potential repercussions of such a huge number of fictitious coins staking at any given moment, but I'll patiently wait for that update in the wallet that allows everyone to actually know the real number of coins that VRC has for the 26.8 mill given by Patrick is obviously an approximation I don't know based on what... 30 (or more) million coins staking can produce a significant number of additional coins by the day.

Oh and Patrick, I don't have to ask Sunny King anything. I ask you because I have invested in you... one of the reasons for it being that I was under the impression that the "dynamic" interest was actually an improvement in the POS distribution model of Sunny King, one that would allow everyone to know, at any moment, the EXACT amount of coins that were staking in the network and the exact amount of total coins in existence. Hopefully, the new iteration of the wallet will provide that sooner rather than later. I will (im)patiently wait...  

And yes I remember that post and given that I have a very good memory, most of all others. Feel indeed free to correct me if I stated in error the numerical order of your alma mater... I expected you to come with some sensible explanation as to what effect did you really wanted to have placing sell order with your 200k coins, really. That doesn't require a special level of intelligence, does it? If you sell, the pressure that you put is towards sending the price down; if you buy, the pressure goes on the other direction. Pretty simple, really. Even for anyone not having studied in an university ranked below 23rd or even community college and I would even say basic education at a very early level, so it would be nice to know exactly what it was that you were trying to achieve... correction, how were you trying to achieve that nobody but you "... would lose anything".

Big thanks to @AwfulProgrammer on twitter for this graphic

Very few VRC and BTC even touched orders due to the exchanges freezing quickly. Less than 100k VRC and 5 BTC. I am not a man of very small financial resources. I am a graduate student with not a very large salary however I have been very successful in other ventures and investing in the past. Frankly, that is none of your business anyhow. And it's not my duty to report on what orders I had or didn't have as there was no net loss or gain. As I said before, go ahead and ask Bittrex about me and my balances if you're so interested. I'm not going to address the issue publicly anymore and if you are truly interested you can feel free to message me directly.

Maybe I'm just not that intelligent. I didn't go to a top 23 University, after all (remember that post of yours?).


Doug is the primary wallet dev. He said there's no way to know the exact number of staking coins, and in the current wallet, there is no way. We have to build in the support (I'm not even sure it's practical to do myself) which I believe Doug is capable of doing.

Feel free to ask Sunny King, the creator of PoS, for details on network stake weight and total number of staking coins.

What Pat meant was it's not possible to pull out that number without editing code.  In the current wallet it's not possible.  By not too much I mean it's relatively attributable to the coin amount give or take some percentage for age. For instance in stake dips  it's quite likely that the number drops below the potentially stakable coin due to young age.  It would however be clearer to just have the raw number of coins to monitor as well.

What would you consider "too much bigger" Doug? We have had a high of over 28 million just in the past 24 hours and I believe it would be quite safe to assume that at least 6 or more million of the total 26.8 million are deposited currently in the different exchanges, quite probably significantly more than 6 million, so if the maximum REAL number was, for instance, 20 million coins -and I DO NOT believe that many have been staking, not even close-, and the weighted coin age network number surpassed 28 million, you would still think the number would not "be too much bigger"?

And, by the way, you just contradicted Patrick -and the choir boys- making abundantly clear what is even more abundantly obvious: That you can indeed know THE EXACT number of coins staking at any given moment, the REAL number of coins. It would be quite nice if any, at least Patrick, would  acknowledge it, don't you think?

Edit to add: Besides the significant numbers mentioned above, there's the additional consideration of the coins that are actually being transferred at any given moment and that are not staking at all... for instance: If someone buy's X amount of VRC at Bittrex and transfer them to his wallet, they will not be staking until after a period of 8 hours... provided the wallet is OPEN, many more hours/days, if the wallet does open at any other time in the future, so the numbers that we know are really not only "too much bigger" but I'd venture to say "staggeringly too much bigger" indeed.

Barabbas...down boy, down! Good boy....

Well Patrick I cannot know where you may have answered that question before but as far as I know -and many others- you haven't answered it HERE, on this forum, where the question has been posed a few times. It is still a bit flimsy, if you ask me, what you just answered... You transferred 200k VRC to bittrex to put on SELL orders ONLY. You have not said here -again, to my knowledge- that you put any BUY orders -like you just have said a moment ago-. I didn't think you would have a bunch of BTC hanging around to do that...AND, more importantly, I still FAIL to see what the "stabilizing" point was to have 200k VRC FOR SALE... It just doesn't make any sense. Let me see the picture that you paint in a bit more detail: Youy transferred 200k of YOUR COINS to bittrex and put up several SELL orders with them "becauser you did not wanted anyone but you to lose anything". You are a bright kind and you will see that that makes absolutely no sense at all, right? If anything, your sell orders would take the price down, more or less significantly. Now, since NOW, you claim to have also put some BUY orders in, how many BTC dis you put in play? And at what levels? Because a lot of people were trying to sell indeed... Depending on the amount of BTC -sorry but my understanding is that you are a man of very small financial resources-, BUYING orders would have helped indeed to prop up the price. And, if so, how come you have never mentioned, much less in specific details, until now?

You would understand that I would qualify the "explanation" as "flimsy", right?

I'll tell you what, why don't you just jump right out on your bright pal "socal"'s bandwagon and call me a fudster and you can continua not answering at all or answering selectively, in place and in subject matters?

This is not looking very good Pat, not at all.