Topic: CLOSED... - page 5. (Read 37424 times)

A lot of people rooting for that coin. I would be a good candidate once Quarkbar is strong enough.

What's the current status?

66coin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!4!!4444!!!!4

We finally have twitter!

Quarkbar needed an emergency fix last night and also got upgraded to DarkgravityWave v3! F0o from Obfuscode did some remarkable things to fix it!

Although I agree that there are some coins that should be given a death sentence, there are other coins that have a very sound and stable foundation and could flourish if given a chance. That is what this foundation is about.

If a coin has been created that has strong charactoristics but the dev walked away for no reason at all, why should it have to die if there is a community willing to step up and give it a fighting chance. That is what this foundation is all about.

This foundation isnt about pumping up the price. Its about finding promising coins that have been abandoned for no good reason  and giving support where needed. Then if the coin flourishes, awesome!

If a coin has a community behind it that wants to see it succeed then great, there will always be bag holders but if the community behind the coin is large enough, the coin will survive even if they dump. 

Plus Im  tired of hearing the term "copycoin"!

In the crypto currency world its not all about bitcoin. In a few years there is going to be many changes, bitcoin may stay on top but probably not. The first always paves the way but the strongest always follows. Crypto currency is still in its infancy. We are still a small community over all. Whats going to happen in the next few years is going to blow our minds. We are fortunate to be involved so early. In a way we are creating a revolution.





 

The aim is to put focus on specific coins that are promising, but the developer is MIA. This is the case with Quarkbar. With a coin like that, you already have:
1. A strong coin
2. A strong community
3. A foundation that can patch it up and make it better

This is a step to make it a community effort instead of handing it to a single developer. We hope we can create a group of community coins in this way. Decentralized power.

If you want to help the community, you should be actively promoting the devs leaving these coins and letting them die.

We are spreading ourselves too thin, there is not enough money or hashing power to prop up the price of all these copycoins.

If we can reduce the number of these coins, that would be beneficial to the entire community.

What you are doing is only beneficial in the short term, but harmful in the long term.
If a coin is going no where, then its going no where and it needs to be put down.
Reviving it is just going to let the bagholders sell out, making a new group of people bagholders when the coin eventually flops again.

We had a good discussion online and decided to focus on Quarkbar right now.

We will do the following things:
1. Fix the problem with DarkGravityWave v2, by patching it to version 3  in progress
2. Promote Quarkbar on Twitter and Facebook  Done
3. Create a website (Shursight arranged hosting and URL)   Done
4. Use site and social media for more attention and giveaways  in progress
5. Create site for Cryptocoin Revival Foundation

Meeting is about to start at irc://freenode/coinrevival

Channel will be irc://freenode/coinrevival

The chat will be at irc://freenode/coinrevival tonight!

The chat will be at irc://freenode/crf tonight!

Great input everybody! I think it would be good to have an IRC discussion tomorrow. I will create a coin revival foundation channel for this. I will post the link tomorrow.

Topics:
- how to select coins
- gpucoin
- qubitcoin
- quarkbar
- duckduckcoin

Time: 1630 GMT (1230 EST, 1830 BERLIN)
LINK: irc://freenode/crf

BitGold is a real problem-coin at the moment.
The chain can't sync because PoS is now more lucrative than mining.
We're the only ppl that tries to rescue the coin by wasting one of our miners (aprox 400 kH/s) on it to try to get transactions still going.
However difficulty is extremely high so even with this effort we're taking a lot of time for to find the block..

It's a hard challenge...

- f0o

Yes, I agree with you Jonesd. The idea of a vote was a good instinct, but it quickly became clear that the "community" was only attracting people who wanted their coin chosen because it sucks, not because they thought it would be best for your foundation.

And what is best for the foundation is success. It really doesn't matter if the coin chosen is a "fun" type of coin or a coin that has something "new" or even something "innovative". All that matters is that you succeed in reviving the coin. Being a dictator on the first couple of coins is ok if it results in an actual revival. 

In addition to all of the fine suggestions you mentioned, I really think that you can sort of reverse the process. In other words, have the old developers almost bid for your foundation's services. I mentioned how DuckDuckcoin (at one point) was offering coins for a takeover. They can't be the only one who would be more than willing to give some coins away in exchange for the hope of a revival. I wouldn't be surprised if some developers even offered up Bitcoins to be taken over.

Obviously , that becomes more realistic, and far easier after the first one or two coins are "revived". Which brings us back to your main point. Yes, I say throw out the vote and let your foundation choose the most promising candidate. I am sure that the community will rally behind whatever coin is chosen as it would help everyone involved for the coin to succeed. I have a few more thoughts, but this post is already too long, and you get the idea. Good luck!

While I understand what you are saying, I must vehemently disagree. I am unfamiliar with 66coin, but I do know (at least a little) about DuckDuckcoin. That was a fun coin (ok, even silly as you put it) that seemed to have a very interested community.

But far more importantly, they are practically begging to be taken over. At one point they were even offering coins to anyone willing to do it. I won't go over the history in detail, but this was one of those IPO coins. So, not only was the community interested (a while ago) but they paid for the privilege.

And as I've stated before, I really think that a success on the first coin of the Coin Revival Foundation is of absolute paramount importance. That success can build momentum for the next coin and help build the community faster than any other thing that they can do. Fighting with some current "developers" (no matter how incompetent) on some random coin is just asking for trouble. 

DuckDuck Coin is practically a shell company at this point. There are only 121 coins in its universe and at one point were willing to pay for the privilege of being taken over. Success is not guaranteed, of course, but the road sure is paved.

Now, it does not have to be Duck. Any coin that seems the easiest should be the one chosen first. I sure wouldn't be surprised if a lot of developers would offer up some of their own coins for a chance at revival.

the difference with gpuc is that the founder is one person and the coders (what you would call devs) are a different group of people.
the founder is why the coin failed due to the lack of communication, shipping not having any sort of tracking, and people not knowing what was going on since even the devs of the software couldnt get any replies back.

considering the coders are willing to help out, i think that it would take some pressure off you guys and permit a much quicker revival of the coin.
its already got a lot of people wishing it was doing better, great logo, asic resistant, and some pretty nice sites built around it that are already paid for. with going full rebrand like you're talking about, that's going to take a lot more effort as where gpuc just needs some CPR and TLC.

A prime example right there, 8coin, well there are 8 billion people in the world now which means shared equally you would need 9 decimal places, and it only goes to 8.
Pure garbage  

I think that's a better idea than trying to taking over another Dev's coin, even if it appears dead. You may still get the coin in the end but I can think of a few that seem to just need some help and not necessarily a hostile take over.

I browsed through my wallets and loaded up a few to see where they stand. Good, bad or otherwise here's a few that I have sitting idle waiting on help...

OneMillionCoin
Original thread : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/closed-558262
Attempted Takeover Thread : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annone-million-coin-omc-90days-quick-mining-community-coin-now-572515
Status : Last block shows as yesterday (05/07) but wallet now shows out of sync with three active connections. Dev was actively seeking help from the community in takeover thread.

8Coin
Relaunch Thread : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-8-8coin-8-total-coins-new-genesis-no-premine-506301
Status : Never knew of the original one but I picked up on the relaunch. Interesting concept similar to 42. Wallet syncs up and everything seems to work but it appears to just lack attention/marketing.

BitGold
Original Thread : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anngold-bitgold-pos-launched-rare-524648
Status : Wallet no longer syncs up and those interested seem to have pulled their miners. Has a pool still mining to support the blockchain so apparently it's a Windows wallet issue only. Dev apparently didn't get the initial support needed to really give this coin a chance but there still seems to be a loyal following that think it has potential.

Those are just a few I have sitting here that look like they could use some help and maybe have potential. For the record, I have no large stash of any one of these but saw some potential so I pointed my miner at them for a while.

I think we should just get people proposing coins here and we try to see how we can help. From there we can see how it develops.