Topic: CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies! - page 46. (Read 639534 times)

How is it a conflict to have something removed that is not accurate?  Smooth, you've publicly stated you don't feel premine is equal to instamine.  You acknowledge that dark/dash was never premined but yet you are perfectly ok with them assigning this incorrect status.  Why?

When I asked you yesterday about the evidence you provided for a "premine", you said there was none.  You provided evidence of a instamine cloaked as a premine.  If the two are not the same why do you keep playing word games??

You are playing word games in an attempt to push your agenda.  This self fulfilling righteous witch hunt to rid crypto of scams and protect investors means nothing when you yourself cannot be honest in your intent.  The fact you continue to play these charades further proves you have no honest intent and you are not objective.  These actions are what turns your so called honest concerns into pure trolling.  Your only goal is to continue to bash dash in a feeble attempt to make monero some how look better.

I can think of several other coins, monero not one of those, right now that could and should be on your list but you only have your sights set on one.  If you were truly objective and worried about the safety of investors, why ignore the other coins with issues too?

To Gliss,

Objectively speaking: A instamined currency would be one where the core features like block reward and coin supply were changed/did not go as planned, after launch that have benefitted a group of very early miners

Gliss is right that it needs to be objective, and the instamines we already know, such as the ones in Dash and Asiacoin, are objective, as the actual core parameters were changed. This rules out the need of saying subjective things like "Evan did the instamine on purpose", or "It was a total coincidence", since the objective proof of the instamine lies in the actual core features having changed(Practically the math behind the currency) after launch.

It probably is best to leave morals/speculation out of it no matter how probable..and just stick to what's known in the coin's history concerning it's parameters. In the case of Dash, it was instamined where it' actual block reward and coin supply were sliced after launch, obviously, hugely, benefitting very early miners. That is objective and therefore I believe it to be very reasonable to add a 'Instamine' currency filter for coins like Dash/Asiacoin and similar, especially since in the case of Dash, the 2million coin, 2 day instamine happened very early on and is not something a newcommer to crypto is likely to know about without research into the coin's history, and similar with Asiacoin where there was a hidden instamine that no one knew about until it was found coincidentally.

Gliss,

smooth and fluffypony are in conflict of interest here. They are "official" (pseudo, so-called) "dev" of other coin, so their opinion in this debate = 0.

This is objectiveness. Conflict of interest = Your vote (and opinion) don't count.

What lack of ethics you have trolleros...

Gliss, here is a good idea of something to add to the site (or is it already there somewhere?):

Again, there is no objectivity to that. "De-optimized" and "crippled" are totally subjective concepts.

Something like changing the mining schedule or coin supply is objective.

You're only reason for being here is to pressure Gliss to *change* CoinMarketCap's classification system to fit your purposes: denigrating Dash - The leading alt after LTC and your largest competitor with 6x you current valuation - at a time when your own valuation is sliding off a cliff.  

Gliss has said he would prefer not to change the rating system and I agree with that.  You don't, so you are still here trying to find new Orwellian classifications that don't classify Monero's launch as a scam - with code proven to let the developers (YOU) mine more coins than the shleps (YOUR INVESTORS) - but do classify Dash's launch as a scam - which noone can prove objectively what the intention was.

give it a break Smooth - credibility - zero.

In that case, my suggestion reflects facts and is therefore relevant.

"Launched with de-optimized or crippled code."

Well done for creating a fix for the purposely deceptive code, if that is what you are saying. But I am pleased that you agree that the code was included as part of the launch package with an original intent to deceive, whatever its root origins.

FluffyPony I am still waiting for you to present the evidence of the Dash premine accusation that you were throwing around here yesterday:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11215773

And everything you said above is subjective - there is no way to know if you and Smooth were deliberately scamming or not with knowledge of the crippled miner.  You can cry about how it wasn't a scam but unfortunately the world doesn't work like that.  It happened and there is no way to know, so you trying to wriggle out of it isn't "factual" lol. I vote for scamming personally given your behavior on public forums, but that is just my opinion.  And I won't start pressuring 3rd party websites to try to agree with my subjective opinion and change their business model to become subjective info site rather than an objective info site based on that.  But you were certainly incompetent if not criminal.  

BTW:

"At the current spot price thats only $345 000 for each of us, but since we'd be pumping out screenshots and other flashy nonsense I'm sure we'd be trading over 0.01 BTC, which would put our stash at a cool $1.73 million for each of us"

Just FYI but it takes a lot more than screenshots to make a coin have value, like development, innovation, usefulness to a market, and credibility of the developers. Seems like Monero is struggling just to stay in the top 20 let alone trade at 0.01 BTC.

then make minermarketcap.com

we are talking about coins not miners

Obviously, as I said, in the case of Monero, we believe (subjectively) it was deliberate. But this isn't about Monero, it is about what coinmarketcap should track and report. There is nothing objective about it, and can't be applied broadly to a database of coins in any rational manner.

Let's stop discussing Monero or any specific coins here and stick to discussing what can be objectively reported by coinmarketcap that would be useful to people who are looking at a large database of coins.

Just putting that comment into context.

Not wishing to dwell on it.

Kind of off topic here. Let's be respectful and stick to discussing cmc?

The "dev" who launched Monero is thankful_for_today: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/thankfulfortoday-233561

Thankfully when we (the current Monero core team) found the purposefully obfuscated code we immediately fixed it and made the fix freely available to all. This is what smooth means when he describes the Monero launch as fair. As dga says, at most thankful_for_today would've had a week of advantageous mining, but as our difficulty retargetting worked just fine and we didn't have crazy high initial block rewards there was very little that the scammer thankful_for_today could've made off with.

Note that these are all facts, directly observable by comparing increases in difficulty (ie. network hash rate) with the improved hashing code submitted to github. It does not require trust, it does not require anyone to take our word that coins have been sold or distributed, it is not based on hope. It is absolute, truthful, factual, verifiable by all.

We could have kept the fix to ourselves and just mined away, amassing a fat stash of XMR. We were under no obligation to release the code for a faster miner, we weren't even in a position of stewardship of the Monero project, we were just a bunch of enthusiasts. If we'd mined for a year with the improved miner we could easily have controlled 90% of the hash rate between us (the improved miner was 12x faster than the original) and mined several million XMR. We could've thrown a flashy GUI together, made wild promises of all sorts of stuff we were going to create (with screenshots) and slowly dumped our stash on an overexcited market.

The 7 members of the Monero core team could be USD millionaires today if we had done that. If I had to throw some numbers out, we'd probably have been able to accumulate around 5.5 million XMR, so 785 000 XMR each. At the current spot price thats only $345 000 for each of us, but since we'd be pumping out screenshots and other flashy nonsense I'm sure we'd be trading over 0.01 BTC, which would put our stash at a cool $1.73 million for each of us (and the total stash would be worth $12 million).

Something to think about.

You guys should take this elsewhere unless you are proposing coinmarketcap to track and report which operating systems are supported by a coin and when it is supported. That's fairly absurd.

Do you think over 90% of the people that mine crypto coins don't have access to Linux computer?

It's not objective, which is what Gliss said he wants. Take Monero for example. We think it was crippled, but who is to say. Maybe the original developers were just retarded, or maybe we don't even know what we're talking about. Moreover, who is going to evaluate all these mining functions from various coins and make a determination. It isn't something that can be determined objectively by a simple rule (or at all).

Please then also add

^crip Launched with de-optimized or crippled code

That is historically factual, and admitted by the project and its devs.

Mining schedule/reward changes after launch is certainly a totally objective and questionable (at best) practice that can be noted sure. Likewise extra coins mined (but not burned) due to (alleged) bugs.

Gliss, what do you think about that idea?

i suggests this..

Dash    $ 15,935,866    $ 2.99    5,321,001 DASH ^{inst blck}


at the bottom of CMC there will be

* Not Mineable
** Significantly Premined
^inst Significantly Instamined
^blck block reward changed

this way instamined scam coins and block reward changing scams won't be CMC resistant.

You are in conflict of interest.

Your opinion don't count, only peanuts.

You are not objective :

"If not THE CLEANEST",  i just can't stop loled.. Tks for this.

Edit : i just check the coinmarketcap site, and oh! Bytecoin +7% , trollero -16%..
Just stop it...