Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 275. (Read 1210783 times)

Then open your eyes, you will see much more.....

Rune    17 (25.4%)
Secore    3 (4.5%)
Vortex    2 (3%)
Boolberry    41 (61.2%)
BitRing    2 (3%)
Boollion    2 (3%)
Total Voters: 67

Dont forget Runescape...

What is iCEBREAKER meant? It is a Spearmint Candy, a big ship breaking ice, or a D.E.A. operation?  

Just tease, don´t mean it serious.  

 

You are misunderstanding me. The dissent is largely from you and sussex from what I see so far, like again and again and again. I don't know if Rune is serious or not, it was the better among the 3 choices for me.

I just thought this was a joke coin LOL. And this is a solid post from you. These cheerleaders are getting delusional.




I am with you all the way man. I think these people are trying to too hard. As long as they remain subservient, I can support them. Otherwise I am out.

What a shitty attempt at sarcasm.  That's all you have left, since sussex has demolished all other failed attempts to rationalize the Rune rebrand.

I fully supported CZ's right to change the name of his coin.  Can you not read English?  Try Google translate if not.

The "nerve of this developer" is where he overrules dissent and then pretends the dissent is from outside the community, as an excuse to ignore it and pretend more than 1/3 of the community is behind him.

Are you saying "Rune" is a "serious" name? 

If so, you might be the dumbest person to ever live on this planet.  Rune is a joke and everybody but you, CZ, and SEO marketing flunkie know it.

Look at the heavy metal bands named Rune.  Look at the comic book named Rune.  Campy?  Yes.  100% Not Serious?  Yes.

I am with you man. The nerve of this developer. I thought this was a joke coin because of the Boolberry name. If they are trying to become serious with name change etc i be tripping and dumping.

Can you send me your logs(qt-boolb.log in folder where exe file) in PM ?

CZ has every right to change the name.  Even to something as terrible as "Rune."

But he can't make it look like he community supports him.

He's trying to anyway.  That is 'pissing on us and calling it rain' to use a popular English idiom.  Or in Russian, 'hanging wet noodles behind our ears.'

Just change the name and be done with it.  If people sell their BBR and leave then that's their choice.   This ridiculous debate over the name will do more harm to BBR than the loss of a few people.  I'm not trying to disrespect anyone that doesn't want the name changed, I agree, but this has gone on long enough.  It's time to move on.  

I didn't like the thought of a name change and would prefer Boolberry over RUNE.  But I remember in the past when this discussion arose that you were adamant about the name Boolbery so I know that it is a name that you like yourself.  If you have decided to change the name that you chose and has meaning to you then nobody should stand in your way.  You launched this coin so I think that gives you the final say in this matter.

I would also like to ask those that don't want the name changed what contribution to BBR have they made other than mining/buying/trading BBR?  Have you donated anything to the dev fund?  Have you done anything other than profit off this coin?  Have you noticed the price since some additional people have gotten involved in BBR?  There is more to a coin than just a name.  If there are ideas that will further move BBR in the direction that we would all like to see it going then I am on board.  

So I think you should make an executive decision, change the name, and get back to developing this coin without these distractions.

For the most urgent matter every to befall the crypto world, the BBR name change, I like the Boolberry Branded as Rune

We can keep the BBR symbol, it has both Boolberry for the conservatives and Rune for the radicals

James

it is not a scam

I asked anonymint some direct questions as to whether there was any realistic danger. After a bit of study, anonymint said he might have found a possible exploit, but needed a bounty to justify spending time researching it, I offered a 5 BTC bounty and suggested XMR side matched it. They did.

overnight, anonymint confirmed there is a possible attack vector and while it would take a lot of hashpower (like what BCX has) and time to setup an attack, that it was a real possibility. but it was possible that the codebase already protects against this.

he made a claim for the bounty and the info is being given to smooth who will get it to CZ. It is possible this has been already addressed, if not anonymint says he has a way to mitigate the issue.

so, there is a possible exploit, the devs will be getting the info to put in a fix before public disclosure of the details.
just another day in crypto

James

So much for CZ's 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

Clearly the BBR community does not want to become the Rune community. 

You can't blame us for resisting such an Epic Fail. 

Rune is an awful name, fit only for death metal bands and ghey comic books aimed at virgin basement dwelling neckbeards:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law_of_triviality
ps: I am guilty of it too

Hmm, five pages of bickering over the name 

Keeping losing bids in an auction makes zero sense and ensures participation is minimized.  That's why no auction does it, besides scam penny auctions.

To maximize funds raised, we want to encourage tactical (IE competitive) bidding, in a transparent environment (one address for BBR, another for Rune).

But I'm not going to risk my coins going to the Rune dev fund, since James can one-up me.

Even with refunds for losing bidders, we would be bidding money where our mouths are.  Because risk of winning means coins go away, as does risk of loss/theft, and opportunity cost of having coins tied up in escrow, plus escrow fees.

To minimize "mischief" CZ could keep 5% of the losing bid as a service fee.

Yea, afaik there is no "coin control" features in cryptonotes, that would allow you to select which inputs to use to make up an output.

Thanks for this explanation. Is it luck of the draw whether I get small or large inputs?

The thing is that we care only about votes of our community.
And we don't care about what had written here by you, smooth or whoever came from whatever. So you just wasting your time here.
It was mentioned that vote made for people who was supported and helped our project, our community members.
This is sad that Icebreaker and teknohog, and couple of others didn't liked, but most of community supported our efforts.

It's likely that your transaction is over the size limit (size limit in kilobytes, not in amount of bbr). The size of your transaction depends on where the inputs came from (if you have lots of small inputs from mining they will make a much larger output than a few larger inputs from withdrawing from an exhcange or something), as well as the mixin count that you're using (the larger mixin count the larger the transaction). Not much you can do except send in the smaller amounts. I think there is an auto-splitting command for monero, but I'm not sure it's been implemented in bbr, and I think it's still upstream in monero anyway.

Techie question...

I'm having issues sending anything over 100 BBR from my wallet.

I can send 99 BBR ok. However whenever I try to send 100 or more I get the follow error message,


Any ideas on what the issue could be?

I'm using the mac wallet.

Thanks in advance!