Personally, I recommend BanzaiBTC.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/banzaibtc-389572
He is a professional at what he does.
For my coins BRE, did the 0.1BTC for one year.
Topic: SUPERCOIN'S REVIVAL - page 34. (Read 115695 times)
Active connections with ECC Wallet is over 18 .
Looking Good!
That is way better than Super even the volume is better
Looking Good!
That is way better than Super even the volume is better
It's true what you say that the community of MWC let the Coin be delisted from Bittrex.....The Super community did the same.
The MWC network is running and working fine as always....Super doesn't it still has problems (Yobitt has it in maintenance mode for several months now)
A separate forum and a block explorer can be solved in a second.
About the highest price and money supply..... The price for SUPER is about 30 SAT at the moment and NO buy orders. The money supply for SUPER is 39.39 Million and growing fast, the money supply for MWC is 27.5 Million.
So for MWC the thing is to get a block explorer and then get it listed on any exchange like Kiklo already pointed out: https://novaexchange.com/addcoin/.
The MWC network is running and working fine as always....Super doesn't it still has problems (Yobitt has it in maintenance mode for several months now)
A separate forum and a block explorer can be solved in a second.
About the highest price and money supply..... The price for SUPER is about 30 SAT at the moment and NO buy orders. The money supply for SUPER is 39.39 Million and growing fast, the money supply for MWC is 27.5 Million.
So for MWC the thing is to get a block explorer and then get it listed on any exchange like Kiklo already pointed out: https://novaexchange.com/addcoin/.
Lowest Price Block Explorer would be http://cryptoguru.tk for 0.01 BTC/month ,
Contact GrinZ at https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/grinz-188159
Along with the Github Source Code,
Create a MWC Community Forum , to give them a meeting place all of their own
Then get listed on Nova Exchange,
Then you have a block explorer and 3 Markets , because they do BTC, LTC & Doge.
Next Step is to Request CoinMarket Cap Add MWC back to their reporting
Go here to request https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf0f95sPIlakbvT0AKXvJpwboNWwQjAj9ZiSdCiqpXcKmumzw/viewform
And if they have not added it within 10 days , post in their forum here as a 2nd request
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coinmarketcapcom-market-cap-rankings-of-all-cryptocurrencies-199685
Oh and when you create the MWC forum be sure to add links to Github and the explorer and Wallet Downloads
Hell , if you do all that you Bring MWC Back to Life,
Once you get the wallet downloads out, I will setup a BlockChain Snapshot for MWC.
Post the MWC forum link here and Griffith's Thread so MWC users know where to go for MWC specific News.
Once all this gets done, I will probably buy some MWC myself.
Bittrex not show danger de-listed MWC and last time make "wallet maitenance" and after this maitenance without warning removing MWC from market. Was possible only withraw coins to wallets.
If I remember good MWC was worth 50-100 satoshi for coin before removing. And I dont know it be removing I was can make some volumen my own coins but I dont know about danger de-listed.
If I remember good MWC was worth 50-100 satoshi for coin before removing. And I dont know it be removing I was can make some volumen my own coins but I dont know about danger de-listed.
Problem is this ,
MWC Community basically let it die ,
the community did not keep an exchange , they did not even keep the MWC network running.
They did not even bother to start a separate thread focusing on MWC.
There is not even a working block explorer for MWC.
The Super Community split off from the 3 coins to save itself and has the highest price per coin.
Griffith is keeping ECC going by force of will alone and maintaining active nodes for it.
But it also has an exchange and even someone with a Buy order at 1 dogeshi that could buy the entire ECC marketcap.
So there is some community support for it.
Plus ECC & Super are not being merged and are starting to grow into stronger individual coins.
However the consensus , is that Super or ECC communities will agree with the Devs decisions on any mergers.
So the final call is theirs. But the fact that MWC basically has 0 value, with no marketcap info makes it impossible to give it a valuation to include in a swap, which means if it is, let's be honest it is pretty much charity for dead coin owners that did not provide any support to keep it alive.
MWC Community basically let it die ,
the community did not keep an exchange , they did not even keep the MWC network running.
They did not even bother to start a separate thread focusing on MWC.
There is not even a working block explorer for MWC.
The Super Community split off from the 3 coins to save itself and has the highest price per coin.
Griffith is keeping ECC going by force of will alone and maintaining active nodes for it.
But it also has an exchange and even someone with a Buy order at 1 dogeshi that could buy the entire ECC marketcap.
So there is some community support for it.
Plus ECC & Super are not being merged and are starting to grow into stronger individual coins.
However the consensus , is that Super or ECC communities will agree with the Devs decisions on any mergers.
So the final call is theirs. But the fact that MWC basically has 0 value, with no marketcap info makes it impossible to give it a valuation to include in a swap, which means if it is, let's be honest it is pretty much charity for dead coin owners that did not provide any support to keep it alive.
It's true what you say that the community of MWC let the Coin be delisted from Bittrex.....The Super community did the same.
The MWC network is running and working fine as always....Super doesn't it still has problems (Yobitt has it in maintenance mode for several months now)
A separate forum and a block explorer can be solved in a second.
About the highest price and money supply..... The price for SUPER is about 30 SAT at the moment and NO buy orders. The money supply for SUPER is 39.39 Million and growing fast, the money supply for MWC is 27.5 Million.
So for MWC the thing is to get a block explorer and then get it listed on any exchange like Kiklo already pointed out: https://novaexchange.com/addcoin/.
Problem is this ,
MWC Community basically let it die ,
the community did not keep an exchange , they did not even keep the MWC network running.
They did not even bother to start a separate thread focusing on MWC.
There is not even a working block explorer for MWC.
The Super Community split off from the 3 coins to save itself and has the highest price per coin.
Griffith is keeping ECC going by force of will alone and maintaining active nodes for it.
But it also has an exchange and even someone with a Buy order at 1 dogeshi that could buy the entire ECC marketcap.
So there is some community support for it.
Plus ECC & Super are not being merged and are starting to grow into stronger individual coins.
However the consensus , is that Super or ECC communities will agree with the Devs decisions on any mergers.
So the final call is theirs. But the fact that MWC basically has 0 value, with no marketcap info makes it impossible to give it a valuation to include in a swap, which means if it is, let's be honest it is pretty much charity for dead coin owners that did not provide any support to keep it alive.
MWC Community basically let it die ,
the community did not keep an exchange , they did not even keep the MWC network running.
They did not even bother to start a separate thread focusing on MWC.
There is not even a working block explorer for MWC.
The Super Community split off from the 3 coins to save itself and has the highest price per coin.
Griffith is keeping ECC going by force of will alone and maintaining active nodes for it.
But it also has an exchange and even someone with a Buy order at 1 dogeshi that could buy the entire ECC marketcap.
So there is some community support for it.
Plus ECC & Super are not being merged and are starting to grow into stronger individual coins.
However the consensus , is that Super or ECC communities will agree with the Devs decisions on any mergers.
So the final call is theirs. But the fact that MWC basically has 0 value, with no marketcap info makes it impossible to give it a valuation to include in a swap, which means if it is, let's be honest it is pretty much charity for dead coin owners that did not provide any support to keep it alive.
I was not interested ECC because this coins was crazy number coins like dogecoin its no have any serious value.
So I will happy if Griffith take MWC coins to new blockchain with Supercoin together.
PS. sorry for bad english.
How much does a coin need to be worth untill its defined as having serious value? Last time I checked 1btc was still worth 1btc.
How can these 2 even be compared. Lets rebrand ecc with a cute little bear , so it can fly up the charts on pure chinese driven hype.
Dogecoin has 105,487,787,954 coins, has seen 395btc volume last 24hrs which gives it a total market cap of $24.2mill USD.
Ecc has 20,091,000 coins, $2volume, & has a marketcap of $77000.
MWC. its best hope is in with super.
HI.
I am from begining with Multiwallet coin old time ago.
Wallet this coin (I mean MWC) was promising have 3 coins inside to trade them: ECC, MWC, SUPER I read for $ or one coin for other coin example ecc vs super or mwc depend from price each one.
I regeistered only on Bittrex and they dont have Ecc & Super but have MWC. Very small markets had ecc/super that days and now too. I was not interested ECC because this coins was crazy number coins like dogecoin its no have any serious value.
So I am bought many MWC because I wanted have wallet with 3 coins to trade and I expected some profit ofc.
I know is MWC is other coin than Super but MWC wallet was supposed to contain inside yours SUPER coins.
I was thinking its dont matter which coins I have because I can switch some my MWC to Super without buying supercoin on other markets because this 3 coins was developing in one Topic on bitcointalk by 2 Devs and "multiwallet" was in developing. Now for Supercoin is separated topic and other coins dont matter ?
Now bittrex delisted MWC coin and some people want have only super coin because they bought and have supercoin and dont care about Multiwallet.
I dont want lose all my bought MWC because Dev (Griffith) stop working on multiwallet or change/have new idea project name to "cryptobank" (?) or focus on Supercoin only.
If its possible I no want be abandon with my MWC and I can swap my MWC to Super If only Super is now continued with developing ...
I hope you understund my problems only because I cant buy Supercoin on normal big markets like bittrex so I bought in exchange MWC because promised wallet was including trading/switching coins to coins so finally I decided which coin I want.
So I will happy if Griffith take MWC coins to new blockchain with Supercoin together.
PS. sorry for bad english.
I am from begining with Multiwallet coin old time ago.
Wallet this coin (I mean MWC) was promising have 3 coins inside to trade them: ECC, MWC, SUPER I read for $ or one coin for other coin example ecc vs super or mwc depend from price each one.
I regeistered only on Bittrex and they dont have Ecc & Super but have MWC. Very small markets had ecc/super that days and now too. I was not interested ECC because this coins was crazy number coins like dogecoin its no have any serious value.
So I am bought many MWC because I wanted have wallet with 3 coins to trade and I expected some profit ofc.
I know is MWC is other coin than Super but MWC wallet was supposed to contain inside yours SUPER coins.
I was thinking its dont matter which coins I have because I can switch some my MWC to Super without buying supercoin on other markets because this 3 coins was developing in one Topic on bitcointalk by 2 Devs and "multiwallet" was in developing. Now for Supercoin is separated topic and other coins dont matter ?
Now bittrex delisted MWC coin and some people want have only super coin because they bought and have supercoin and dont care about Multiwallet.
I dont want lose all my bought MWC because Dev (Griffith) stop working on multiwallet or change/have new idea project name to "cryptobank" (?) or focus on Supercoin only.
If its possible I no want be abandon with my MWC and I can swap my MWC to Super If only Super is now continued with developing ...
I hope you understund my problems only because I cant buy Supercoin on normal big markets like bittrex so I bought in exchange MWC because promised wallet was including trading/switching coins to coins so finally I decided which coin I want.
So I will happy if Griffith take MWC coins to new blockchain with Supercoin together.
PS. sorry for bad english.
HOW DOES POS WORK AFTER THE 50 MILLION COINS HAVE BEEN MINED?
SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE A DETAILED EXPLANATION - THANKS!
SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE A DETAILED EXPLANATION - THANKS!
it works as normal, just instead of new coins being minted, you are only given fees from that block. if no transactions are sent in that block to generate fees, you are given 0
Quote
Supercoin will cap at 50 million coins and after 4 years will be forever stuck at 5% PoS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14010844
HOW DOES POS WORK AFTER THE 50 MILLION COINS HAVE BEEN MINED?
SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE A DETAILED EXPLANATION - THANKS!
SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE A DETAILED EXPLANATION - THANKS!
Exactly it must operate separately. You had always listened to the community & I hope you will listen this time too. Actually it all started (swapping to new chain) to make SUPER again SUPER.So the question is: Will merging with other make it advanced? Definitely not.So let them operate independently & separately.
Thanks
Thanks
It would make it way more advanced if this cross chain would be usable (and I think it is) for sending and receiving "foreign coins" in to the wallet. If that is the case with the cross-chain implantation then it's a must to do it or just test it.
If the Super guys are against it then test it with MWC because it would make the wallet the most important of them all ....think of it as 1 wallet for all...MultiWallet
Sending cross-chain will also open the way for development of a peer to peer exchange. With the wallet being the single piece of software to send and receive and trade any coin.
I can see the bigger picture....and appreciate all the work Barry is doing
with the cross chain, its not all coins in one wallet. its works by sending MWC to an invalid address, and then the new chain picks it up. it eliminates all the coins that send to the new chain and you only end up with the new coin. its not a multiwallet, its a merger into one new coin
edit:
so for example, if the new chain is supercoinplus
and MWC and SUPER can send to it.
the MWC and SUPER chains disappear and both become supercoinplus. its basically an automatic coin swap
Ok, thanks for explaining
Exactly it must operate separately. You had always listened to the community & I hope you will listen this time too. Actually it all started (swapping to new chain) to make SUPER again SUPER.So the question is: Will merging with other make it advanced? Definitely not.So let them operate independently & separately.
Thanks
Thanks
It would make it way more advanced if this cross chain would be usable (and I think it is) for sending and receiving "foreign coins" in to the wallet. If that is the case with the cross-chain implantation then it's a must to do it or just test it.
If the Super guys are against it then test it with MWC because it would make the wallet the most important of them all ....think of it as 1 wallet for all...MultiWallet
Sending cross-chain will also open the way for development of a peer to peer exchange. With the wallet being the single piece of software to send and receive and trade any coin.
I can see the bigger picture....and appreciate all the work Barry is doing
with the cross chain, its not all coins in one wallet. its works by sending MWC to an invalid address, and then the new chain picks it up. it eliminates all the coins that send to the new chain and you only end up with the new coin. its not a multiwallet, its a merger into one new coin
edit:
so for example, if the new chain is supercoinplus
and MWC and SUPER can send to it.
the MWC and SUPER chains disappear and both become supercoinplus. its basically an automatic coin swap
hey guys,
apologies for the inconsistent replies so far; work, breathing, lying down - it all seems too much these days.
griffith did contact me a little while back and i did want to state - super won't be merging, however the crosschain mechanism will allow coins to jump to new chain without much fuss.
i've been toying with the name 'supercoinplus' (as thats what my devclient is called)..
however, who knows.. in the future other coins could be 'encouraged' to jump chains.. h0h0
james
apologies for the inconsistent replies so far; work, breathing, lying down - it all seems too much these days.
griffith did contact me a little while back and i did want to state - super won't be merging, however the crosschain mechanism will allow coins to jump to new chain without much fuss.
i've been toying with the name 'supercoinplus' (as thats what my devclient is called)..
however, who knows.. in the future other coins could be 'encouraged' to jump chains.. h0h0
james
Exactly it must operate separately. You had always listened to the community & I hope you will listen this time too. Actually it all started (swapping to new chain) to make SUPER again SUPER.So the question is: Will merging with other make it advanced? Definitely not.So let them operate independently & separately.
Thanks
Thanks
It would make it way more advanced if this cross chain would be usable (and I think it is) for sending and receiving "foreign coins" in to the wallet. If that is the case with the cross-chain implantation then it's a must to do it or just test it.
If the Super guys are against it then test it with MWC because it would make the wallet the most important of them all ....think of it as 1 wallet for all...MultiWallet
Sending cross-chain will also open the way for development of a peer to peer exchange. With the wallet being the single piece of software to send and receive and trade any coin.
I can see the bigger picture....and appreciate all the work Barry is doing
It's really up to the devs but if I had any say in it, I would be strongly against merging SUPER with anything else.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
keep going with the discussion, but it seems more people just want it to stay separated.
Exactly it must operate separately. You had always listened to the community & I hope you will listen this time too. Actually it all started (swapping to new chain) to make SUPER again SUPER.So the question is: Will merging with other make it advanced? Definitely not.So let them operate independently & separately.
Thanks
dont worry, listening to all opinions. depending on how my test with ECC goes tomorrow (if you dont have the wallet it is incredibly slow to open and to sync and has been for a long time) could have some news for other stuff as well
It's really up to the devs but if I had any say in it, I would be strongly against merging SUPER with anything else.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
keep going with the discussion, but it seems more people just want it to stay separated.
Exactly it must operate separately. You had always listened to the community & I hope you will listen this time too. Actually it all started (swapping to new chain) to make SUPER again SUPER.So the question is: Will merging with other make it advanced? Definitely not.So let them operate independently & separately.
Thanks
Neat idea would be to run Supercoin through a block explorer and log all balances (besides dust), nullify the chain by changing pchMessage bytes, change block value for block 1 to a suitable amount which could encompass total values of addresses that we've logged, relaunch chain and then distribute on block 2.
Other variables could be changed to reflect current state of coin including block reward etc.
This way everyone can just dump their existing addresses via dumpprivkey; move to new wallet, reimport the keys and everything should be (relatively) as it was. Except the wallet isn't chugging through 2,000,000 blocks to sync; or verify when a new key is added.
About 4 hours work.
Note - I do not hold any SUPER; someone has approached me asking how this coin could be made 'SUPER' again.
barrystyle
Other variables could be changed to reflect current state of coin including block reward etc.
This way everyone can just dump their existing addresses via dumpprivkey; move to new wallet, reimport the keys and everything should be (relatively) as it was. Except the wallet isn't chugging through 2,000,000 blocks to sync; or verify when a new key is added.
About 4 hours work.
Note - I do not hold any SUPER; someone has approached me asking how this coin could be made 'SUPER' again.
barrystyle
keep going with the discussion, but it seems more people just want it to stay separated.
It's really up to the devs but if I had any say in it, I would be strongly against merging SUPER with anything else.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
If coin specs gets changed that significantly, it might as well be renamed as it's no longer the original SUPER.
well i can tell you that i messaged barry last night to remove ECC as the code he has was for MWC ECC AND SUPER. but it should now just be MWC and SUPER.
i have no problems with him running super from now on although at this point purely due to github status i am lead dev. i will pass it on if he wants it
i actually havent done any dev work for ECC recently. i have some updates i want to test on it that i realized you could do when making an android wallet for the company i work at right now.
to clear up the stuff with vegas, as far as coin development goes i no longer actually code for any of his coins. i stepped down from that when i got the job at the crypto company i work at now. (which is what actually eats up most of my time). the only thing i do for vegas anymore is work with him on freelance dev work with any coin who needs something for a price. he deals with the people and i just make the products
edit: a lot of the stuff doesnt have to do with the code itself, but rather how the blockchain is actually stored and loaded on the computer (serialization process). turns out any of the 0.8x bitcoincore based coins like MWC ECC and SUPER all have the same space waste because of how they deal with orphan blocks. it is fixable. although might require a resync.
i have no problems with him running super from now on although at this point purely due to github status i am lead dev. i will pass it on if he wants it
My issue is Griffith is tied up with ECCoin and Some of Vegas coins plus the coin wallet service part of flycoin,
that really leaves very little time for Supercoin.
that really leaves very little time for Supercoin.
i actually havent done any dev work for ECC recently. i have some updates i want to test on it that i realized you could do when making an android wallet for the company i work at right now.
to clear up the stuff with vegas, as far as coin development goes i no longer actually code for any of his coins. i stepped down from that when i got the job at the crypto company i work at now. (which is what actually eats up most of my time). the only thing i do for vegas anymore is work with him on freelance dev work with any coin who needs something for a price. he deals with the people and i just make the products
edit: a lot of the stuff doesnt have to do with the code itself, but rather how the blockchain is actually stored and loaded on the computer (serialization process). turns out any of the 0.8x bitcoincore based coins like MWC ECC and SUPER all have the same space waste because of how they deal with orphan blocks. it is fixable. although might require a resync.
Jump to: