[NEM] NEM -New Economy Movement - No Envy Movement - Updates+Discussion thread - page 474.

Zoella

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: utopianfuture on January 28, 2014, 11:55:47 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

Okie let's experiment some ways to restrict sockpuppet accounts; but let's do it at page 81 since the rules until page 80 has been set.

Agree, mostly. Any OBVIOUS dupes should be removed however.

Zoella

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

For any posts BEFORE page 81, any NXT/BTC account that has been used to submit buy-in more than once should be reviewed. If tied to multiple accounts, refund all transactions after the first and mark the user accounts of all the subsequent requests as ineligible.

utopianfuture

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 268

Internet of Value

Quote from: wakasaki808 on January 28, 2014, 01:59:14 PM

Quote from: utopianfuture on January 28, 2014, 11:55:47 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

Okie let's experiment some ways to restrict sockpuppet accounts; but let's do it at page 81 since the rules until page 80 has been set.

you talking like create something about a minimum requirement? So like must have been created prior to announcement of NEM and/or any of the NXT clones?

Not really because a disclaimer is already put there that "the fund raising terms are subject to changes upon the discretion of the development team" to ensure idea of " Completely Fair Distribution - Equal Shares for ALL". If the community think that the issue of socketpuppet account damages "Completely Fair Distribution" then we going to implement a counter-measure. But it will not apply retrospectively, only from page 81 and up.

But if we are going to implement a counter-measure, I need someone to be able to police it because I can't track all of these myself.

wakasaki808

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 500

Quote from: utopianfuture on January 28, 2014, 11:55:47 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

Okie let's experiment some ways to restrict sockpuppet accounts; but let's do it at page 81 since the rules until page 80 has been set.

you talking like create something about a minimum requirement? So like must have been created prior to announcement of NEM and/or any of the NXT clones?

mailmansDOG

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

and what is this exactly?

utopianfuture

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 268

Internet of Value

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

Okie let's experiment some ways to restrict sockpuppet accounts; but let's do it at page 81 since the rules until page 80 has been set.

utopianfuture

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 268

Internet of Value

Quote from: Sebastien256 on January 28, 2014, 10:41:23 AM

Quote from: coinopolis on January 28, 2014, 10:36:16 AM

Utopianfuture,

You said the price would increase to 3000-4000 NXT. Now you have it listed that there will only be a 5 NXT increase after every ten pages after 250 NXT. You should not be changing funding rules after accepting peoples money. This change in funding rules has now devalued all of the previous investors contributions, and makes it seems like a ploy to get early investors interested. If you keep up with these tactics people will lose trust in this project.

I don't agree, as long as difficulty to join is increasing and not decreasing, im OK with that.

That was one of my prediction of the price when we launch the genesis block. I think it is a conservative guess. But the fundraising will be over well before that point and the fee to join in is never intended to be that high because we want a lot of people to join in.

deftonikus

member

Activity: 75

Merit: 10

YES, totally agree from some point promotion should be mandatory, that is as effective as it gets... GOOD IDEA!!!

SayLouder

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 0

Quote from: Sebastien256 on January 28, 2014, 10:53:14 AM

Quote from: SayLouder on January 28, 2014, 10:37:18 AM

Quote from: Sebastien256 on January 28, 2014, 10:23:32 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

I like that.

EDIT: another thought. Maybe keep fee constant from now on and put promotion mandatory. Overall, with more promotion there will likely be less sockpuppet in proportion.

Just came by from a Polish bitcoin forum. I play at our local forum, not here very much. I don't understand why you don't want me to join in.

I don't understand the meaning of your sentence. Please rephrase. I never said that I don't want you in.

I want to answer you but they keep me wait. So restrict, that's why i want to stay local forum.

Sebastien256

hero member

Activity: 715

Merit: 500

Quote from: SayLouder on January 28, 2014, 10:37:18 AM

Quote from: Sebastien256 on January 28, 2014, 10:23:32 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

I like that.

EDIT: another thought. Maybe keep fee constant from now on and put promotion mandatory. Overall, with more promotion there will likely be less sockpuppet in proportion.

Just came by from a Polish bitcoin forum. I play at our local forum, not here very much. I don't understand why you don't want me to join in.

I don't understand the meaning of your sentence. Please rephrase. I never said that I don't want you in.

Sebastien256

hero member

Activity: 715

Merit: 500

Quote from: coinopolis on January 28, 2014, 10:36:16 AM

Utopianfuture,

You said the price would increase to 3000-4000 NXT. Now you have it listed that there will only be a 5 NXT increase after every ten pages after 250 NXT. You should not be changing funding rules after accepting peoples money. This change in funding rules has now devalued all of the previous investors contributions, and makes it seems like a ploy to get early investors interested. If you keep up with these tactics people will lose trust in this project.

I don't agree, as long as difficulty to join is increasing and not decreasing, im OK with that.

SayLouder

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 0

Quote from: Sebastien256 on January 28, 2014, 10:23:32 AM

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

I like that.

EDIT: another thought. Maybe keep fee constant from now on and put promotion mandatory. Overall, with more promotion there will likely be less sockpuppet in proportion.

Just came by from a Polish bitcoin forum. I play at our local forum, not here very much. I don't understand why you don't want me to join in.

Sebastien256

hero member

Activity: 715

Merit: 500

Quote from: gvans on January 28, 2014, 10:02:47 AM

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

I like that.

EDIT: another thought. Maybe keep fee constant from now on and put promotion mandatory. Overall, with promotion mandatory and more external promotion there will likely be less sockpuppet in proportion.

opticalcarrier

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 27, 2014, 10:56:14 PM

[[Development Update]]...Let me know what you think.

How about this... Continue using LONG data type for amount. As unsigned, this allows from 0 - 18446744073709551616 and we could always IMPLY 9 decimal points, such that now we have amounts from 0.0 NEM - 18,446,744,073.709551616 NEM. This is well within the 4 billion limit. The only thing here is we may want to do additions of volume, assets exchanges, etc such that that may not be a large enough number for appropriate representation.

In this case, perhaps we could just standardize on 5 decimals? With 4 Billion, surely 5 would be enough decimals, giving us 0.0 NEM to 184,467,440,737,095.51616 NEM

Lokda

member

Activity: 68

Merit: 10

Quote from: Zahlen on January 28, 2014, 09:06:06 AM

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 27, 2014, 10:56:14 PM

- I will also change the account numbers to be more bitcoin-like

Will you be using the proposed Reed-Solomon encoding ricot and NxtChg are working on for Nxt?

I'm thinking a different format would be better, so that NEM addresses can't (in general) be interpreted as NXT addresses by clients and vice-versa. There are simpler encoding schemes (linear codes) which can also do character typo detection and correction (but, unlike Reed-Solomon, not for character omission), and which don't require field algebra. They can be easily implemented from scratch without using 3rd party libraries.

I can expand on this if there's interest.

I think this idea is THE good idea for adresses.

utopianfuture

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 268

Internet of Value

Updates: Stakeholder list is updated to page 71. Check to see if you are in the list and let me know. Next update will be at page 81 and at page 81 update, the list up to page 71 will be considered final.

What I did in making List 1 is to go through every posts and check if the post satisfies the condition in that page. If yes I label "Y" next to that account; if no the condition column is left blank. List 2 is the List 1 sorted in an alphabetical order of the account names. I will erase any duplicate name in List 2. So if your account is in List 2 and has a "Y" in condition column then you are a stakeholder. If you think you are qualified but you account is missed from the list or your account does not have a "Y" label, then let me know right away.

List 3 is development stake list. Development stake reserve is 200 and will be distributed to contributors of this project. Jaguar and Thies will be responsible for technical development category. I will be responsible for promotional development category. Some names are already in there. The takers of remaining spots in community effort and branding resources would be decided by the community. This is a community project so let's make the decision together.

gvans

sr. member

Activity: 281

Merit: 250

Just an idea to get less 'sockpuppets'. From now on you could require both the fee AND promotion (proof). Say from page 75 onwards, would increase the visibility better too.

Zahlen

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: Jaguar0625 on January 27, 2014, 10:56:14 PM

- I will also change the account numbers to be more bitcoin-like

Will you be using the proposed Reed-Solomon encoding ricot and NxtChg are working on for Nxt?

I'm thinking a different format would be better, so that NEM addresses can't (in general) be interpreted as NXT addresses by clients and vice-versa. There are simpler encoding schemes (linear codes) which can also do character typo detection and correction (but, unlike Reed-Solomon, not for character omission), and which don't require field algebra. They can be easily implemented from scratch without using 3rd party libraries.

I can expand on this if there's interest.

SZZT

sr. member

Activity: 273

Merit: 250

On the other hand, OP has clearly shown that it started as an action towards the voices crying that NXT distribution was not fair.
To show that there should be no envy, since not much is needed to participate.

I joined because of the "No Envy - Egalitarian". I have no problem with how Nxt was distributed, and i would really see this work take off. Not for the financial gain mind you, but for the kicks. I would love to see how a coin set up this way could go.

Nem seems to be taking off in a haste. I don't mind taht, some of the names here are quite respected, i went back to their posts and was happy.
People will always complain. OP could've said 12 bil coins, straight from a mailing list, people would still be unhappy.

I'm perfectly happy with No Envy. I think it is more original for a coin, than just claim "new economy".
I believe that crypto in general IS the new economy, more and more fiat institutions are coming in the cryptoworld.

PS I'm a member of your reddit page, that's how i found you. Why aren't more of you there?

Bitye West

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: nextgencoin on January 28, 2014, 02:44:34 AM

Quote from: Bitye West on January 28, 2014, 02:39:42 AM

Quote from: nextgencoin on January 28, 2014, 02:34:26 AM

Quote from: ThePatient on January 28, 2014, 02:14:38 AM

Can the 'no envy movement' part get dropped? too hippyish, imo

agree, it's ok when we fundraise but why hinder it's development after. it comes across as charity rather than a legitimate coin.

It's just a thought but what about changing NEM as well. The only reason is we might be able to come up with a more exciting name rather than looking like a NXT clone....which of course it is but still..

What happened to "New Economy Movement"?

I thought that sounded awesome.

yeah that bit is nice.....like the idea of being part of going against the status quo and corrupt financial world.

It should just be "NEM - New Economy Movement"

The "No Envy Movement" part just makes me think of NXT.

Topic: [NEM] NEM -New Economy Movement - No Envy Movement - Updates+Discussion thread - page 474. (Read 661525 times)