MemoryCoin had an extremely fair launch, despite technical challenges - announced, roughly on time, all clients functional and anyone could join from minute 0 (with a little work). Technical challenges are not unreasonable with such major innovative features, namely: a brand new distributed voting system, plus automatic stakeholder controlled grants, plus cpu/memory-constrained scrypt-jane hashing.
Yes the voting is hard to use and maybe noone fully understands it yet. What a surprise the *brand new innovative experimental features* don't have a "1-Button For Dummies" GUI yet.
As for claiming "insta-mine"?? No. There's currently only 15000 coins minted out of 1 million+ scheduled, which is barely 3x the scheduled rate for the first 3 days, and they are widely distributed across many cpu-only miners. Hardly an insta-mine. A minimal level of vestment was necessary to get the voting system boot-strapped and tested.
The grant credits FreeTrade is talking about come from *FUTURE MINTED* coins, using the voting system to direct the built-in grant system -- and once there are enough proposals, the coinholders themselves will be voting on the grants. (FreeTrade, I think you must emphasize this point, else people might assume the grants are like all those clonecoin premine stashes. They don't realize yet there's a totally new technology here.
Yes, thanks for your commentary. I think you might one of the only people who fully understands the voting system so far. It takes a bit of reading. I'm trying to coax people into learning about it by getting them to engage with different aspects of it.
Also it would be good to get a list of grant proposals in front of the users for voting soonest - and fixed bids are probably better than too many open-ended ones(?)).
Yes, in the long run, open ended grants are for foundations, charities, things with an ongoing purpose.
For fixed scope projects, I'd expect people to use the fixed-bid addresses. There's a learning curve there though.