charity is going to sean's outpost
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1617
agreeing with the rest.
redistributing between those who voted is unnecessary and just an appeal to greed.
or what other reason is there to hold on to your idea after you learned about the spoil addresses? that would be the fairest way of redistribution...
Topic: [PSA] MemoryCoin 2.0 Dev abandons coin - page 8. (Read 8420 times)
53 coins going to each officer every 20 blocks is absurd.
Depends on what he/she/they do for the coin. Note that having 10,000 coins is irrelevant for the voting system since more than one million coins have already been issued and all of them can vote. In fact, I think that the CSO has been replaced recently that means that the community is selecting who takes the positions.
Now that the coin has reached a estable value I hope that more individuals/enterprises apply for the positions so we can see a constructive 'competition' to provide services to the coin: a professional on marketing who could attract media coverage, the charity position that isn't covered yet could reinforce the community-oriented basis of the coin...
Redistributing the coins of the positions without criteria would just devaluate the coin. This coin has a mechanism to make it grow and offer more services, so let's see what people can do to add value and support them.
Dude, the vote is weighted to how much MMC you have in your wallet. Someones vote who has 10,000 MMC's in their wallet will have 10x the voting power as someone with 1000( not necessarily the ratio used, just an example). Since these guys have been holding office for a couple weeks and gaining upwards of 500mmc per day, it's sufficient to say some of them have over 8k in MMC when your average miner in a pool might be lucky to have a couple hundred.
This is not decentralized. There is a possibility for these guys to gain so much control that it would take a massive coordinated campaign to remove them from office.
If each address/wallet with at least 1 MMC got one equal vote and the number of MMC beyond 1 had no weight, along with maybe a 2 coin payout per 20 blocks I would be okay with it. But 53 coins every 20 blocks is just a faucet for a selected few while diluting miners worth at the same time.
Here is wiki's definition of decentralization: Decentralization (or decentralisation) is the process of redistributing or dispersing functions, powers, people or things away from a central location or authority.
Redistributing is what I want to do.
Send a Satoshi to this address MVTEceo3RoiqBhfqjVovtyMAVUJLoHiGTg
Or
Vote for these spoil addresses if you don't trust or want me to redistribute the coins, please!
MVTEceo1111111111111111111111TvNrt
MVTEcha11111111111111111111116GDGs
MVTEcmo1111111111111111111115e9dK3
MVTEcto1111111111111111111119owJby
MVTEcno222222222222222222222B1FB3W
MVTEcso555555555555555555555G6uEbs
53 coins going to each officer every 20 blocks is absurd.
This is not decentralized. There is a possibility for these guys to gain so much control that it would take a massive coordinated campaign to remove them from office.
If each address/wallet with at least 1 MMC got one equal vote and the number of MMC beyond 1 had no weight, along with maybe a 2 coin payout per 20 blocks I would be okay with it. But 53 coins every 20 blocks is just a faucet for a selected few while diluting miners worth at the same time.
Here is wiki's definition of decentralization: Decentralization (or decentralisation) is the process of redistributing or dispersing functions, powers, people or things away from a central location or authority.
Redistributing is what I want to do.
Send a Satoshi to this address MVTEceo3RoiqBhfqjVovtyMAVUJLoHiGTg
Or
Vote for these spoil addresses if you don't trust or want me to redistribute the coins, please!
MVTEceo1111111111111111111111TvNrt
MVTEcha11111111111111111111116GDGs
MVTEcmo1111111111111111111115e9dK3
MVTEcto1111111111111111111119owJby
MVTEcno222222222222222222222B1FB3W
MVTEcso555555555555555555555G6uEbs
53 coins going to each officer every 20 blocks is absurd.
I completely agree with you, the payment is too high for single persons when you add up the value of coins and say that the officer isn't doing any work and giving some away to others doing relevant stuff.
But you didn't really think this through in my opinion.
MMC is not a descendant of PTS, it has been around before and the only connections are that the communities are close because of the PTS honoring, and that FreeTrade worked on the PTS client. (you may call MMC a DAC, like you may do with BTC).
I would regard MMC as decentralized, because the whole network can have influence on who fills out a position. The officers have to provide value for the coin, or people will change their vote. There are some candidates already for every position, choose the one you trust most. Or run for a position yourself if you think you could do better.
That was my intention when running for CSO - it didn't seem fair to me, that a lot of people from the community are helping out and the one guy rewarded for that job sticks to pushing some forum threads around once a day. Now I'm working hard on setting up a good team to do real work on getting the support section to a professional level.
What kind of work are miners doing, except setting up their boxes and watching prices? How many hours did an average miner spend during the last days to add value to MMC?
Your proposal is not much better than the guy having a big stake and compromising the office by voting for himself. The coins are divided better, but not doing any good for development.
tl;dr if you're looking at short-term numbers and profits, go with this. if you want MMC to develop as fast as possible, look for a real candidate
and if it's about the coins the miners can't earn or you think all options are lame you can vote for a position reward to not get paid to anyone - this is explained in the voting howto https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/memorycoin-20-voting-how-does-it-work-372982
But you didn't really think this through in my opinion.
MMC is not a descendant of PTS, it has been around before and the only connections are that the communities are close because of the PTS honoring, and that FreeTrade worked on the PTS client. (you may call MMC a DAC, like you may do with BTC).
I would regard MMC as decentralized, because the whole network can have influence on who fills out a position. The officers have to provide value for the coin, or people will change their vote. There are some candidates already for every position, choose the one you trust most. Or run for a position yourself if you think you could do better.
That was my intention when running for CSO - it didn't seem fair to me, that a lot of people from the community are helping out and the one guy rewarded for that job sticks to pushing some forum threads around once a day. Now I'm working hard on setting up a good team to do real work on getting the support section to a professional level.
What kind of work are miners doing, except setting up their boxes and watching prices? How many hours did an average miner spend during the last days to add value to MMC?
Your proposal is not much better than the guy having a big stake and compromising the office by voting for himself. The coins are divided better, but not doing any good for development.
tl;dr if you're looking at short-term numbers and profits, go with this. if you want MMC to develop as fast as possible, look for a real candidate
and if it's about the coins the miners can't earn or you think all options are lame you can vote for a position reward to not get paid to anyone - this is explained in the voting howto https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/memorycoin-20-voting-how-does-it-work-372982
MMuQj9wZQyepNL1SkKkDaCaHFmo4DqkYFb
Thanks
Thanks
Freetrade was finally voted out and is abandoning the coin just like he did with Memorycoin 1. Stay away from this developer. This was predicted in this thread. He will most likely attempt to have the coin removed from exchanges as he did with his previous coin. He succeeded in having the coin removed from bter previously with MEC (memorycoin 1).Proceed with caution.
Developer FreeTrade has granted himself large amounts of MMC through a pre-mine. These awards, upwards of 205,000 coins as he later disclosed after much pressure. These coins were disguised as a pre-mine that was given to protoshare holders and memorycoin 1 contributors. Plus he has been raking in ~48 coin per every 20 blocks for holding the CEO position. Aaaaaaannnnnnd ~15,000 coin from holding the CTO position for awhile in the beginning.
If one person controls that many coin from day 1, the voting aspect of the coin is compromised and this voting aspect is the one thing that was to distinguish this coin from other alts. Especially since the coin failed to remain GPU resistant.
Good luck all. I advise you to be careful here.
See this thread and these other threads for more info:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4476668 (his faux interview disclosing his stake after much pressure)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2124.msg24636#msg24636
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2047.0
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3143884
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2125.0
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2817.msg35078#msg35078. New
Read for yourself, especially FreeTrades responses.
Do you due diligence!
Last update regarding this for now. I will check back in a few months. See how the coin is doing. Good luck, although you might have better luck with Coinye, COYE!
Developer FreeTrade has granted himself large amounts of MMC through a pre-mine. These awards, upwards of 205,000 coins as he later disclosed after much pressure. These coins were disguised as a pre-mine that was given to protoshare holders and memorycoin 1 contributors. Plus he has been raking in ~48 coin per every 20 blocks for holding the CEO position. Aaaaaaannnnnnd ~15,000 coin from holding the CTO position for awhile in the beginning.
If one person controls that many coin from day 1, the voting aspect of the coin is compromised and this voting aspect is the one thing that was to distinguish this coin from other alts. Especially since the coin failed to remain GPU resistant.
Good luck all. I advise you to be careful here.
See this thread and these other threads for more info:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4476668 (his faux interview disclosing his stake after much pressure)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2124.msg24636#msg24636
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2047.0
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3143884
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2125.0
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2817.msg35078#msg35078. New
Read for yourself, especially FreeTrades responses.
Do you due diligence!
Last update regarding this for now. I will check back in a few months. See how the coin is doing. Good luck, although you might have better luck with Coinye, COYE!
Jump to: