It's also rather lame that you continue to respond to criticism of DRK not on its merits but by attacking another coin
What you've promoted are not "criticisms" they're simply person preferences - a very different thing.
A valid technical "criticism" is where you point out areas that the project doesn't meet it's design specifications or market priorities - not *your* design specifications or priorities.
I said criticisms, not technical criticisms. I have both.
As for design goals, it is stated quite clearly that darkcoin aims to allow you to remain anonymous. It is not stated that it allows you remain anonymous
as long as masternodes aren't spying on you or themselves being spied upon, something which can never be verified, and can't rationally be blindly trusted.
I criticize this as technically weak, at such a fundamental and profound level such that it makes the entire core mission of the system a sham.
If you want throw meaningful anonymity overboard and focus on things like market cap, API compatibility with BTC, etc. be my guest, but as far as I know the stated core mission still includes anonymity.
That's what's disingenuous of your entire repertoire here and the only reason it came to my attention was because of your blatant arrogance over other aspects such as your dismissal of the dev's competence and nonsense about "fake marketcaps".
LOL, nice way to dismiss the fact that both enormous concentration of ownership (likely but difficult to prove) and blatant manipulation of supply in the form of enormously cut to available new supply (which has inarguably occurred), a) matter, b) can affect market cap, and c) make the whole thing look like some kind of penny stock joke.
Really I don't think any of the market caps matter very much though, as they are all trivially small. We'll see what happens if and when that isn't the case.
(oh snap, he said it!)