If he shows here, I will donate him some ANC
https://coinplorer.com/ANC/Addresses/AeJzyktipdu9e5vbpidETtoJ15oDqZ9QKR
Topic: Official Anoncoin chat thread (including history) - page 156. (Read 530660 times)
It is good to see Top address is doesn't stops from buying.
If he shows here, I will donate him some ANC
https://coinplorer.com/ANC/Addresses/AeJzyktipdu9e5vbpidETtoJ15oDqZ9QKR
If he shows here, I will donate him some ANC
https://coinplorer.com/ANC/Addresses/AeJzyktipdu9e5vbpidETtoJ15oDqZ9QKR
Well Well.
The price is awful!
I got to say, It leaves me a little puzzled... albeit all the work is being done for ANC and its GIT people don't seem to like it a bit!
The price is awful!
I got to say, It leaves me a little puzzled... albeit all the work is being done for ANC and its GIT people don't seem to like it a bit!
I think ANC time is coming, based building is in progress.
Do not worry much..
Well Well.
The price is awful!
I got to say, It leaves me a little puzzled... albeit all the work is being done for ANC and its GIT people don't seem to like it a bit!
The price is awful!
I got to say, It leaves me a little puzzled... albeit all the work is being done for ANC and its GIT people don't seem to like it a bit!
Someone locked this thread?? 
If you didn't know, now is good time to switch btc to ANC,
and ofc best thing for DRK fans is to sell DRK asap, and support ANC, future of anonymity.
DRK scam bring fortune to devs, now it is time that you think of yourself.
Pablo, welcome back! You dump the price, now it is time to pump it back!
If you didn't know, now is good time to switch btc to ANC,
and ofc best thing for DRK fans is to sell DRK asap, and support ANC, future of anonymity.
DRK scam bring fortune to devs, now it is time that you think of yourself.
Pablo, welcome back! You dump the price, now it is time to pump it back!
For motto/slogan of AnonCoin I suggest: "In Zero Knowledge We Trust"
EDIT:
For non-USAmericans I shall add that its based on U$A dollar's: "In God We Trust"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust
EDIT:
For non-USAmericans I shall add that its based on U$A dollar's: "In God We Trust"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust
Hello everyone,
Im currently investigating an issue with our ANC wallet where the blockchain isnt picking up the majority of our send transactions. We apologize it took us so long to spot the issue. But we are working hard on correcting it and getting the unconfirmed transactions pushed to the blockchain
Some of them get confirmed after a simple restart of the daemon but others do not/ Ill keep everyone informed when I find the solution
Thank you for your patience
UPDATE:
I think it comes down to transaction sizes. Our daemon is sending transactions that are too large to be accpeted into the chain. Im basing this on the fact that all unconfirmed send transactions have unusually high fees paid. Our default Txfee is .01 ANC and the mean over the last 1000 transactions is 0.10169169169169 which is why our withdrawal fee is set to .1 ANC
Our daemon is up to date so ill be going over the source to see if I can find anything that would cause this
Im currently investigating an issue with our ANC wallet where the blockchain isnt picking up the majority of our send transactions. We apologize it took us so long to spot the issue. But we are working hard on correcting it and getting the unconfirmed transactions pushed to the blockchain
Some of them get confirmed after a simple restart of the daemon but others do not/ Ill keep everyone informed when I find the solution
Thank you for your patience
UPDATE:
I think it comes down to transaction sizes. Our daemon is sending transactions that are too large to be accpeted into the chain. Im basing this on the fact that all unconfirmed send transactions have unusually high fees paid. Our default Txfee is .01 ANC and the mean over the last 1000 transactions is 0.10169169169169 which is why our withdrawal fee is set to .1 ANC
Code:
anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee
"fee" : -0.82000000,
"fee" : -0.90000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.65000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.81000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.78000000,
"fee" : -0.79000000,
"fee" : -0.85000000,
"fee" : -0.96000000,
"fee" : -0.64000000,
"fee" : -0.66000000,
"fee" : -0.67000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.79000000,
"fee" : -0.84000000,
"fee" : -0.87000000,
"fee" : -0.92000000,
"fee" : -0.95000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.63000000,
"fee" : -0.64000000,
"fee" : -0.65000000,
"fee" : -0.66000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.70000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.78000000,
"fee" : -0.80000000,
"fee" : -0.83000000,
"fee" : -0.88000000,
"fee" : -0.92000000,
"fee" : -0.99000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.97000000,
"fee" : -0.87000000,
"fee" : -0.81000000,
"fee" : -0.86000000,
"fee" : -0.82000000,
"fee" : -0.90000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.65000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.81000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.78000000,
"fee" : -0.79000000,
"fee" : -0.85000000,
"fee" : -0.96000000,
"fee" : -0.64000000,
"fee" : -0.66000000,
"fee" : -0.67000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.77000000,
"fee" : -0.79000000,
"fee" : -0.84000000,
"fee" : -0.87000000,
"fee" : -0.92000000,
"fee" : -0.95000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.63000000,
"fee" : -0.64000000,
"fee" : -0.65000000,
"fee" : -0.66000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.68000000,
"fee" : -0.69000000,
"fee" : -0.70000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.71000000,
"fee" : -0.72000000,
"fee" : -0.73000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.74000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.75000000,
"fee" : -0.76000000,
"fee" : -0.78000000,
"fee" : -0.80000000,
"fee" : -0.83000000,
"fee" : -0.88000000,
"fee" : -0.92000000,
"fee" : -0.99000000,
"fee" : -0.98000000,
"fee" : -0.97000000,
"fee" : -0.87000000,
"fee" : -0.81000000,
"fee" : -0.86000000,
Our daemon is up to date so ill be going over the source to see if I can find anything that would cause this
Btw, https://twitter.com/i2p/status/499755192838279168 .. The discussion between me, zzz (i2p's main dev) and orignal (i2pd's main dev) about the implementation methods ANC will use has started ANC doesn't feel that far away from going default i2p transport. But there is still a lot to do before i2pd is perfect and stable. Getting to this milestone is awesome!
ANC doesn't feel that far away from going default i2p transport. But there is still a lot to do before i2pd is perfect and stable. Getting to this milestone is awesome! Here is an interesting idea from the Monero thread: I too have been annoyed that the none of the clients out there (including anoncoin) check to see if a new version/update is available.
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
It's not the first currency where I tell this: one of the first features of a wallet should be to check, at least at start-up, if it's outdated and tell the user to update. There will always be 2 version numbers available: last known version and last mandatory version.
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
Interesting. It would be very useful to add this feature to next wallet.
Its not something new, it got invented by BTC
Here is an interesting idea from the Monero thread: I too have been annoyed that the none of the clients out there (including anoncoin) check to see if a new version/update is available.
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
It's not the first currency where I tell this: one of the first features of a wallet should be to check, at least at start-up, if it's outdated and tell the user to update. There will always be 2 version numbers available: last known version and last mandatory version.
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
Interesting. It would be very useful to add this feature to next wallet.
Its not something new, it got invented by BTC
Here is an interesting idea from the Monero thread: I too have been annoyed that the none of the clients out there (including anoncoin) check to see if a new version/update is available.
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
It's not the first currency where I tell this: one of the first features of a wallet should be to check, at least at start-up, if it's outdated and tell the user to update. There will always be 2 version numbers available: last known version and last mandatory version.
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
Interesting. It would be very useful to add this feature to next wallet.
+1
Here is an interesting idea from the Monero thread: I too have been annoyed that the none of the clients out there (including anoncoin) check to see if a new version/update is available.
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
It's not the first currency where I tell this: one of the first features of a wallet should be to check, at least at start-up, if it's outdated and tell the user to update. There will always be 2 version numbers available: last known version and last mandatory version.
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
Interesting. It would be very useful to add this feature to next wallet.
I'm gonna look closer on this. But GF rage so later after a walk
Here is an interesting idea from the Monero thread: I too have been annoyed that the none of the clients out there (including anoncoin) check to see if a new version/update is available.
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
It's not the first currency where I tell this: one of the first features of a wallet should be to check, at least at start-up, if it's outdated and tell the user to update. There will always be 2 version numbers available: last known version and last mandatory version.
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
It's not difficult to implement and even the command line wallet can have that check.
Ohwell, maybe in the next version
Well, the thing is, we don't want the daemon making non-p2p connections unless explicitly allowed by the user, so checking via the web is a no-go. What we *can* do is add functionality where if > 58% of connected peers (ie. 7 of the standard 12 max) are on a newer version, notify the user that a new version is available. Peers can indicate the last mandatory version, too, and if you're on a version < that version the daemon can pump out lots of warnings, and simplewallet can have an additional confirmation dialog for every transaction before sending.
I didn't want to start this thread against Pablo.
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
Respond to your KGW statement;
Something in that area yes. But the replacement of KGW is under testing internally, final patches for testnet4 are not pushed yet, neither commited since we currently adjusting some values & testing out. Some more ZC code is written too, but in the same file, so it will be pushed when values for the new thing is defined. ANC will continue with the same values etc for the end user. I'm only talking about internal variables to keep a somewhat same approach as KGW without using it :p
Yea, yea, I'm good I know, thank you :p
We do not have anything, do not buy , wait for new highs
I didn't want to start this thread against Pablo.
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
Respond to your KGW statement;
Something in that area yes. But the replacement of KGW is under testing internally, final patches for testnet4 are not pushed yet, neither commited since we currently adjusting some values & testing out. Some more ZC code is written too, but in the same file, so it will be pushed when values for the new thing is defined. ANC will continue with the same values etc for the end user. I'm only talking about internal variables to keep a somewhat same approach as KGW without using it :p
I didn't want to start this thread against Pablo.
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
He is very good analyzer and know much things like US history,politic, world problems, etc.
Maybe talking to much what is not connected with ANC. Maybe too much criticize, and not much direct offer to resolve, just go more and more in non-existent problems.
Or I would say unnecessarily debate which do not help ANC at this time.
I think we do not understande much because difference in generation/years, an that is normal to look different on problems : )
I will give you some info what I hacked , maybe you will anylyze, or buy more ANCs even today
KGW got some few mistakes which makes it open to attack, and will be replaced with MeehsBlackHole.....
Testnet4 is created for testing..
do not spread
and one more thing I noticed, nice meeh's respond to daddy of Zerocoin paper
https://twitter.com/mikalv/status/499173890766422016
Wow, what crap do I have to read here xD
How can you guys discuss this stuff here. I mean there is NOTHING noteworthy from these posts here nor will this result in anything.
Don't argue - drop the issue and go on with your puny lives.
How can you guys discuss this stuff here. I mean there is NOTHING noteworthy from these posts here nor will this result in anything.
Don't argue - drop the issue and go on with your puny lives.
Well thank you for the excellent discourse. It appears you made a new account on bitcointalk for the soul purpose of making worthless comments on a single altcoin thread.
Literary gems such as:
and my personal favorite:
Great point. The future of this coin is the logo and allegiance to the script-kiddies behind anonymous. Now that you have made your point could you please stop spamming the thread? All the devs care about is implementing a great algo and making a fantastic coin. Clearly they are missing the big picture. Maybe its time for you to sell your coins and get back into doge.
Yes. the interest in anonymity is the whole point of this coin from the beginning (which predates the anonymity fad). Are you here for the political message? What does that even mean. Not interested in protests. Not interested in privacy. Your just that guy, got some free time and trolling the Internet.
I mean if you are going to post you might as well say something worth saying.
Literary gems such as:
Quote
Again, if you have a point, an opinion, an argument, fine. But ad hominem is for morons who can't think.
I'm not trying to make enemies but I'm not trying to make friends either.
I'm just offering my opinion.
I'm not trying to make enemies but I'm not trying to make friends either.
I'm just offering my opinion.
Quote
I don't doubt that you have a lot of college degrees, but I question their value.
You and several others on this thread have excellent rhetorical skills but there seems little substance behind them.
You and several others on this thread have excellent rhetorical skills but there seems little substance behind them.
and my personal favorite:
Quote
As for the devs credibility, when they dropped the mask they lost it. They jumped into the jello pit to wrestle over "which coin is most anonymous".
Great point. The future of this coin is the logo and allegiance to the script-kiddies behind anonymous. Now that you have made your point could you please stop spamming the thread? All the devs care about is implementing a great algo and making a fantastic coin. Clearly they are missing the big picture. Maybe its time for you to sell your coins and get back into doge.
Quote
1) Yes there is interest obviously in coins with anonymity. Nobody doubts that. So what point are you making? You are saying "there is an interest in privacy coins, therefore anoncoin is justified in..." what? Making that its only focus?
Yes. the interest in anonymity is the whole point of this coin from the beginning (which predates the anonymity fad). Are you here for the political message? What does that even mean. Not interested in protests. Not interested in privacy. Your just that guy, got some free time and trolling the Internet.
I mean if you are going to post you might as well say something worth saying.
Although I disagree with no-ice-please latest incarnation regarding the importance of zerocoin, I think he makes a valid point about connecting the coin to anonymous. The political clout that follows should not be underestimated and will sett ANC apart from the rest of the privacy-bunch.
It is not just an opportunistic question of political clout etc.
What are the intentions of the people who have been supporters of anc? Is the goal to always work on a more secure algo so they can secure their money? Or is it something more useful?
that wasnt much of a summary, im still curious - what do you think should be done?
My suggestion. First decide what anc is after.
If the goal is to cash in on the privacy craze then at least be honest about it. Be explicit "we intend to whore out however much is necessary to cash in". Then focus on marketing strategies etc.
If the goal is to contribute something positive, then also be upfront "we are making a currency by our own rules, and it's purpose is to further an established value system often symbolized by the guy falkes mask" etc.
Until it is clear what direction anc is going it is hard to recommend what it should do.
ok, maybe i wasnt clear enough, ill try this: what direction do you wish anoncoin to go and what should be done while going that direction? methods, goals and so on...
im not trying to be an asshole here, im curious.
It is my personal opinion. I can't talk for anybody but myself.
Very true. Do the devs share your priorities, I ask the devs?
You are spinning around and around , other words , same shablon of conspiracy or do not know what do you want from ANC.
I can doubt that we will se in some part that you will start advertise some other coin on this chat thread.
We all know goals of ANC team. We know what we must know, besides we want more and now.. maybe it not go by the plan with time, but gnosis still doing his work + we have meeh who starts working to help him for faster implantation.
Goal is ZC, future plan we can read out from meeh's working out of ANC.
Here is work what we can see
http://privacysolutions.no/
https://hideme.today/dev/
enjoy the ride of anonymity!
EDIT: you can see that meeh's don't sleep much
https://github.com/Anoncoin/anoncoin/commit/c2c0cc746f3a837e754c5ddc40d66490132c717e
Jump to: