Topic: NA - page 233. (Read 893612 times)
As a silent supporter of Guldencoin I will raise my suspicions on what I am seeing unfolding. LTEX has a conflict of interest between AUR and Guldencoin and I do think he wants both coins to succeed. AUR just does not have the support Guldencoin has, not even close. So causing a bit of shit here and there and getting a few ex guldencoin supporters to switch coins will be a benefit to him.
As per the post below by a ex Guldencoin supporter.
Interesting to see you here as well. I am looking around a bit, this last week, a bit tired of that nationcoin we were both interested in. Actually I am still am, when things change. I really hated the way the devs treated you, after doing so much for the coin. Btw, I am still holding some aurora and after seeing you here, I am holding even longer, I guess. I really like your marketing performances. Something else, I found another interesting cheap coin MAGI (xmg) which looks very good, I think. At the moment, I am unloading the nationcoin ( you know which one I am talking about) a bit and investing in MAGI.
Well, best of luck with your projects.
Expect the flaming against the founders and devs to continue until AUR is able to get enough of a community to start itself up again.
As per the post below by a ex Guldencoin supporter.
I have been in close contact with Balduro from the beginning. It has always been clear to me that his plan was to launch this project and setup the initial parameters, but he also made it clear he was not intending to run or manage things forever. He wanted to create a community that would take over for he was trying to make this a truly decentralized coin. That's why I still believe he will deliver on his promise to destroy the pre-mine once this community has proven to be able to be selfsupporting. This is what will happen shortly as Dinobotta described above...
Still, if nothing happens in a decent timeframe, we also have the opportunity to rule out the pre-mine addresses during the inevitable hard fork. So either way, we're good...
Still, if nothing happens in a decent timeframe, we also have the opportunity to rule out the pre-mine addresses during the inevitable hard fork. So either way, we're good...
Interesting to see you here as well. I am looking around a bit, this last week, a bit tired of that nationcoin we were both interested in. Actually I am still am, when things change. I really hated the way the devs treated you, after doing so much for the coin. Btw, I am still holding some aurora and after seeing you here, I am holding even longer, I guess. I really like your marketing performances. Something else, I found another interesting cheap coin MAGI (xmg) which looks very good, I think. At the moment, I am unloading the nationcoin ( you know which one I am talking about) a bit and investing in MAGI.
Well, best of luck with your projects.
Expect the flaming against the founders and devs to continue until AUR is able to get enough of a community to start itself up again.
Having had a quick look at AUR again something doesn't quite add up. The dev has not responded in almost a year, no updates to the coin in ages and your still waiting for the developer to take action while threatening to take over the coin.
It takes many minds and many opinions to make something work, the dev team is trying to be inclusive as possible and if you look at any other coin there is no democracy like you have with Guldencoin.
The reason I'm with Auroracoin from zero hour is simply because I think it represents a country that is by far the best place on earth to successfully implement Cryptocurrency. I therefor have supported it all the way, even when things got bad and rough. We are now forming a completely new DEV team that already has a registered foundation in Reykjavik, so we are getting rid of all the secrecy and make it transparent like NLG.
This might also give you an insight why I'm struggling so hard to keep supporting NLG as well. I'm here to seriously turn NLG (and AUR) into the most successful coins around. That's where my drive to fight for improvement on the dev side comes from!
I can respect that, is the dev team going to be from Iceland and will they be using the code that the NLG developers bring out to use on AUR?
Yup, one of the most important things was getting local people involved. We are very lucky to have found some excellent guys with good track records! We have a different, but very dedicated dev team there...
Enough talk though, get those Icelander devs to release some updates and PM me when they do and I will take look.
The current extremely long block times are more the result of dedicated miners having left the playing field, leaving us with only multipools.
It's guys like Biomike that kept things rolling when the multipools were raping the coin, they have left now partially due to the one sided enforcements of the Dev team you try to defend. The way G-J was "progressing" on his sim, we would still be on DGW3 now and at current low dedicated hashes, we would be stuck in total...
Just to prove my point I just doubled the entire net's hash rate through Criptoe for a while...
There you go ;-):
Having had a quick look at AUR again something doesn't quite add up. The dev has not responded in almost a year, no updates to the coin in ages and your still waiting for the developer to take action while threatening to take over the coin.
It takes many minds and many opinions to make something work, the dev team is trying to be inclusive as possible and if you look at any other coin there is no democracy like you have with Guldencoin.
The reason I'm with Auroracoin from zero hour is simply because I think it represents a country that is by far the best place on earth to successfully implement Cryptocurrency. I therefor have supported it all the way, even when things got bad and rough. We are now forming a completely new DEV team that already has a registered foundation in Reykjavik, so we are getting rid of all the secrecy and make it transparent like NLG.
This might also give you an insight why I'm struggling so hard to keep supporting NLG as well. I'm here to seriously turn NLG (and AUR) into the most successful coins around. That's where my drive to fight for improvement on the dev side comes from!
I can respect that, is the dev team going to be from Iceland and will they be using the code that the NLG developers bring out to use on AUR?
Yup, one of the most important things was getting local people involved. We are very lucky to have found some excellent guys with good track records! We have a different, but very dedicated dev team there...
Having had a quick look at AUR again something doesn't quite add up. The dev has not responded in almost a year, no updates to the coin in ages and your still waiting for the developer to take action while threatening to take over the coin.
It takes many minds and many opinions to make something work, the dev team is trying to be inclusive as possible and if you look at any other coin there is no democracy like you have with Guldencoin.
The reason I'm with Auroracoin from zero hour is simply because I think it represents a country that is by far the best place on earth to successfully implement Cryptocurrency. I therefor have supported it all the way, even when things got bad and rough. We are now forming a completely new DEV team that already has a registered foundation in Reykjavik, so we are getting rid of all the secrecy and make it transparent like NLG.
This might also give you an insight why I'm struggling so hard to keep supporting NLG as well. I'm here to seriously turn NLG (and AUR) into the most successful coins around. That's where my drive to fight for improvement on the dev side comes from!
I can respect that, is the dev team going to be from Iceland and will they be using the code that the NLG developers bring out to use on AUR?
Congrats on the promotion mr' HeroMember! 
Thanks. Never would have thought that a year ago that I would become a "hero"
Having had a quick look at AUR again something doesn't quite add up. The dev has not responded in almost a year, no updates to the coin in ages and your still waiting for the developer to take action while threatening to take over the coin.
It takes many minds and many opinions to make something work, the dev team is trying to be inclusive as possible and if you look at any other coin there is no democracy like you have with Guldencoin.
The reason I'm with Auroracoin from zero hour is simply because I think it represents a country that is by far the best place on earth to successfully implement Cryptocurrency. I therefor have supported it all the way, even when things got bad and rough. We are now forming a completely new DEV team that already has a registered foundation in Reykjavik, so we are getting rid of all the secrecy and make it transparent like NLG.
This might also give you an insight why I'm struggling so hard to keep supporting NLG as well. I'm here to seriously turn NLG (and AUR) into the most successful coins around. That's where my drive to fight for improvement on the dev side comes from!
Please not the discussion about GJ and Criptoe again.
LTEX I understand some points about leadership and equal aknowledgement of members you are worried about. (Gizfreak en Lejenk kom er maar in
)
But the current devs are doing a good thing atm as I see it. Communication also improved a lot about the algo change.
So please join forces again. You have made your point and it is good that you want to defend some respected members, but let them do it for themselves.
Rijk is not leading because of decentalisation, he says. But sometimes he is leading, but doing as if he is not leading, as I see it.
That is not always clear and consistent. That needs to be more clear, that's all, I think and is the reason you have mistrust also.
Let this thunderstorm lead to fruitfull talks about leading this coin instead of fingerpointing. My wish.
LTEX I understand some points about leadership and equal aknowledgement of members you are worried about. (Gizfreak en Lejenk kom er maar in
)But the current devs are doing a good thing atm as I see it. Communication also improved a lot about the algo change.
So please join forces again. You have made your point and it is good that you want to defend some respected members, but let them do it for themselves.
Rijk is not leading because of decentalisation, he says. But sometimes he is leading, but doing as if he is not leading, as I see it.
That is not always clear and consistent. That needs to be more clear, that's all, I think and is the reason you have mistrust also.
Let this thunderstorm lead to fruitfull talks about leading this coin instead of fingerpointing. My wish.
Your wish will be granted Sir!
Congrats on the promotion mr' HeroMember!
Please not the discussion about GJ and Criptoe again.
LTEX I understand some points about leadership and equal aknowledgement of members you are worried about. (Gizfreak en Lejenk kom er maar in)
But the current devs are doing a good thing atm as I see it. Communication also improved a lot about the algo change.
So please join forces again. You have made your point and it is good that you want to defend some respected members, but let them do it for themselves.
Rijk is not leading because of decentalisation, he says. But sometimes he is leading, but doing as if he is not leading, as I see it.
That is not always clear and consistent. That needs to be more clear, that's all, I think and is the reason you have mistrust also. I think both you and Rijk want the best for Guldencoin.
Let this thunderstorm lead to fruitfull talks about leading this coin instead of fingerpointing. My wish.
LTEX I understand some points about leadership and equal aknowledgement of members you are worried about. (Gizfreak en Lejenk kom er maar in
)But the current devs are doing a good thing atm as I see it. Communication also improved a lot about the algo change.
So please join forces again. You have made your point and it is good that you want to defend some respected members, but let them do it for themselves.
Rijk is not leading because of decentalisation, he says. But sometimes he is leading, but doing as if he is not leading, as I see it.
That is not always clear and consistent. That needs to be more clear, that's all, I think and is the reason you have mistrust also. I think both you and Rijk want the best for Guldencoin.
Let this thunderstorm lead to fruitfull talks about leading this coin instead of fingerpointing. My wish.
The current extremely long block times are more the result of dedicated miners having left the playing field, leaving us with only multipools.
It's guys like Biomike that kept things rolling when the multipools were raping the coin, they have left now partially due to the one sided enforcements of the Dev team you try to defend. The way G-J was "progressing" on his sim, we would still be on DGW3 now and at current low dedicated hashes, we would be stuck in total...
It's guys like Biomike that kept things rolling when the multipools were raping the coin, they have left now partially due to the one sided enforcements of the Dev team you try to defend. The way G-J was "progressing" on his sim, we would still be on DGW3 now and at current low dedicated hashes, we would be stuck in total...
Having had a quick look at AUR again something doesn't quite add up. The dev has not responded in almost a year, no updates to the coin in ages and your still waiting for the developer to take action while threatening to take over the coin.
It takes many minds and many opinions to make something work, the dev team is trying to be inclusive as possible and if you look at any other coin there is no democracy like you have with Guldencoin.
Fuse makes VALID points. From reading how things have been posted lately, I feel he's been shunned and targetted for trying to help, and he's the only one from the outside trying to help!!! So what gives?
I'm not going to deny that the way the errors were presented weren't a little upsetting to me and my team. When /GJ and I were discussing the issues in IRC, he asked if we should make a post about not moving forward with the change yet. I suggested that we state that the code still needed to be worked on, improved and tested, and that my team would provide full support with testnets, hashrate, etc. What the community got was a little different from that. My team wasn't exactly happy about it. We worked to provide support when support was lacking, and we made a single line code mistake that ended up causing this delay.
That being said, I don't see it as a shunning so much as another excuse to delay a change. /GJ said himself the only reason he's going forward with it is because the community demanded it:
Understand that if it were up to me, we'd take more time to develop and test a better solution. But it seems the majority of the community wants to try Digishield..
A better solution. Not DIGI. A better solution.
I understand that things take time. I understand that things need to be tested, including the validity of the simulator. But you aren't going to find a more effective method of dealing with CM any time soon that doesn't involve a massive overhaul of the entire codebase, or an extremely long period of testing. If you want to test DIGI against the simulator, so be it. I'm all for seeing if it can accurately simulate real mining. But don't delay what has already been delayed for 4 months while we wait for a tool that won't fix the issue. And let me be clear- I wholeheartedly want the simulator to succeed. But it's a long term project that doesn't need to be mutually exclusive of the algo change. Fix the mistake that was made when DGW3 was implemented, and work on whatever you want to work on for the future of the coin. In the meantime, without a code change, we're dealing with this still:
While the code we uploaded had a small error, the algorithm was in fact providing results. If the devs don't trust the results, I suggest they start up a testnet and test it themselves. Or the community. Or anyone for that matter. Real mining data that can be quantified and examined in real-time by anyone. Just don't sit around playing it ultra-conservative because you want to wow the community with some new innovative idea or tool. Push forward, make the changes that need to be made and refocus on the your future goals. This change doesn't need to be the last change this coin ever makes. If we have to push out another update at a later time, so be it, but at least we didn't sit around while 45 million more NLG get mined by CM.
Implementing Digi in NLG isn't even that much work, no need to ask the Digi dev's to do that for us.
What IS a lot of work is proving that Digi will actually protect us from a jumping pool, that's why we need to run these simulations. We need prove that the algorithm adjusts properly, and we must be able to explain HOW and WHY the algorithm is adjusting properly.
What IS a lot of work is proving that Digi will actually protect us from a jumping pool, that's why we need to run these simulations. We need prove that the algorithm adjusts properly, and we must be able to explain HOW and WHY the algorithm is adjusting properly.
Two things I take from this post, and I could be extremely wrong, but I'm going to take a stab at it anyway. First, DIGI isn't hard for /GJ to implement. So he could have it done now if he really wanted to. Second, there is already live blockchain data out there, and my "erroneous" testnet data, that proves DIGI works to mitigate jumping pools like CM.
Why delay if you have both parts of the equation? Just solve for X already.
-Fuse
Here is a post I found where /GeertJohan wasn't happy about Digishield. We should have more faith in this dev team.
The current extremely long block times are more the result of dedicated miners having left the playing field, leaving us with only multipools.
It's guys like Biomike that kept things rolling when the multipools were raping the coin, they have left now partially due to the one sided enforcements of the Dev team you try to defend. The way G-J was "progressing" on his sim, we would still be on DGW3 now and at current low dedicated hashes, we would be stuck in total...
Just to prove my point I just doubled the entire net's hash rate through Criptoe for a while...
Fuse makes VALID points. From reading how things have been posted lately, I feel he's been shunned and targetted for trying to help, and he's the only one from the outside trying to help!!! So what gives?
I'm not going to deny that the way the errors were presented weren't a little upsetting to me and my team. When /GJ and I were discussing the issues in IRC, he asked if we should make a post about not moving forward with the change yet. I suggested that we state that the code still needed to be worked on, improved and tested, and that my team would provide full support with testnets, hashrate, etc. What the community got was a little different from that. My team wasn't exactly happy about it. We worked to provide support when support was lacking, and we made a single line code mistake that ended up causing this delay.
That being said, I don't see it as a shunning so much as another excuse to delay a change. /GJ said himself the only reason he's going forward with it is because the community demanded it:
Understand that if it were up to me, we'd take more time to develop and test a better solution. But it seems the majority of the community wants to try Digishield..
A better solution. Not DIGI. A better solution.
I understand that things take time. I understand that things need to be tested, including the validity of the simulator. But you aren't going to find a more effective method of dealing with CM any time soon that doesn't involve a massive overhaul of the entire codebase, or an extremely long period of testing. If you want to test DIGI against the simulator, so be it. I'm all for seeing if it can accurately simulate real mining. But don't delay what has already been delayed for 4 months while we wait for a tool that won't fix the issue. And let me be clear- I wholeheartedly want the simulator to succeed. But it's a long term project that doesn't need to be mutually exclusive of the algo change. Fix the mistake that was made when DGW3 was implemented, and work on whatever you want to work on for the future of the coin. In the meantime, without a code change, we're dealing with this still:
While the code we uploaded had a small error, the algorithm was in fact providing results. If the devs don't trust the results, I suggest they start up a testnet and test it themselves. Or the community. Or anyone for that matter. Real mining data that can be quantified and examined in real-time by anyone. Just don't sit around playing it ultra-conservative because you want to wow the community with some new innovative idea or tool. Push forward, make the changes that need to be made and refocus on the your future goals. This change doesn't need to be the last change this coin ever makes. If we have to push out another update at a later time, so be it, but at least we didn't sit around while 45 million more NLG get mined by CM.
Implementing Digi in NLG isn't even that much work, no need to ask the Digi dev's to do that for us.
What IS a lot of work is proving that Digi will actually protect us from a jumping pool, that's why we need to run these simulations. We need prove that the algorithm adjusts properly, and we must be able to explain HOW and WHY the algorithm is adjusting properly.
What IS a lot of work is proving that Digi will actually protect us from a jumping pool, that's why we need to run these simulations. We need prove that the algorithm adjusts properly, and we must be able to explain HOW and WHY the algorithm is adjusting properly.
Two things I take from this post, and I could be extremely wrong, but I'm going to take a stab at it anyway. First, DIGI isn't hard for /GJ to implement. So he could have it done now if he really wanted to. Second, there is already live blockchain data out there, and my "erroneous" testnet data, that proves DIGI works to mitigate jumping pools like CM.
Why delay if you have both parts of the equation? Just solve for X already.
-Fuse
Here is a post I found where /GeertJohan wasn't happy about Digishield. We should have more faith in this dev team.
oops just to break the argument. i sent my coins to trex almost 30 mins ago and it still isnt in trex. is there something wrong? or sending really takes time?
NLG is supposed to solve 576 blocks per day, currently it is solving a little over 10% of that. See http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/ So it will take a lot longer for transactions to confirm. Why? Above my pay grade. Ask the devs...
I think the Criptoe team pushed for a Digishield change, on DGW3 we were getting around 576 blocks a day. Although something needed to be done but I remember /GeertJohan advising against going digishield. I will try find the post where this was made.
oops just to break the argument. i sent my coins to trex almost 30 mins ago and it still isnt in trex. is there something wrong? or sending really takes time?
NLG is supposed to solve 576 blocks per day, currently it is solving a little over 10% of that. See http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/ So it will take a lot longer for transactions to confirm. Why? Above my pay grade. Ask the devs...
oops just to break the argument. i sent my coins to trex almost 30 mins ago and it still isnt in trex. is there something wrong? or sending really takes time?
sometimes it just takes longer
investigated already.
there are still no confirmations and at the explorer, my transaction doesnt exist
oops just to break the argument. i sent my coins to trex almost 30 mins ago and it still isnt in trex. is there something wrong? or sending really takes time?
sometimes it just takes longer
Oh, but I'm in no way posting against Malcolm! And i seriously don't want to chase him away! I already said in the dutch reply he deserves to be paid for all I care!
As much as I would like to believe that, I have to ask why it is then that you are already coming up with conspiracy theories about my work.e.g. That I am supposedly having problems with scrypt, the only reason the possibility of dropping scrypt when multi-algo kicks in has come up at all is because some community members asked (on both this and the other forum) whether it is possible.
This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with technical limitations in either frank or mines code - in fact the scrypt code is already working, it would need to be in order for the port to be testable and for the current block chain to remain usable.
Dropping scrypt saves me exactly 0 work, if it is going to be dropped it will be based on a proper discussion about the merits of various algorithms and which ones we want to keep, a discussion we have already stated multiple times we want to have very soon on the community forums.
While I certainly don't expect people to accept the work I do without question - on the contrary I would find it quite unsettling if there was no input on various things, and have very little patience for yes men; suck-ups or fanboys - I certainly find it somewhat distasteful to have people already spreading rumours after such a short period of time and with no facts to back them up.
While I personally am not phased by such things, you may want to at least wait until I miss the first deadline or the first bug is found before you start casting stones or you may find it harder to attract developer talent in future, not all developers have a thick skin and most of us have 100s of projects begging us to join them, generally we want to get on with actual work and not be dragged into political battles (or whatever it is going on here).
Know that I am on probation, as you the Guldencoin community are with me, if the community doesn't like my work, or me, once I have actually delivered it, they are welcome to tell me to take a hike, likewise if I as a developer don't feel the community is one I see a future in I will be equally quick to move on elsewhere.
I'm not getting any further involved in this fight except to say that in the end it is the community that is getting harmed when things like this happen, perhaps this should be considered before turning every little discussion into a fight over the same thing and using bystanders as ammunition in that fight.
Fair enough Malcolm. Again, this has nothing to do with you! You haven't been here long enough to be even bothered with it, so you can expect nothing but my support here as long as you deliver good work. From what I've read in the Panda forums, I do trust you are going to. The fact I took over 4 hours of back-tracking you has nothing to do with mistrust or hostility, it's just me, a shareholder of Guldencoin, doing Due Diligence.
You seem to know a lot about the internal workings of the coins community for a person that claims he doesn't know much. Trying to get more people to dump out or making sure the coin doesn't succeed because you dumped out. It would be a real shame if the price had to go to 1000 if you dumped out a few weeks ago.
Smoke and mirrors here.
Trying to get more people to dump out or making sure the coin doesn't succeed because you dumped out. It would be a real shame if the price had to go to 1000 if you dumped out a few weeks ago. Smoke and mirrors here.
Umm. Where did I say I didn't know much? Please quote me? I seriously hope the coin does go to 1000. I made a profit when I sold out, I hope you do too.
Jump to: