Topic: Vertcoin holders! almost 20% of your coins were mined in the first 30 hours - page 2. (Read 4908 times)

Dude, That's Litecoin graph  

Wow. I'm happy I didn't buy into that vert marketing scam. I knew they were full of shit when they posted like idiots without knowing anything about code.

Litecoin and quark are much more respectable.

i know one person admitted that he made 1000 btc in two day of mining

but i want to preserve is privacy

also it is very naive from you thinking that bitcoin was not instamining when  it is so obviously, no one know about it back then so the diff was without a doubt really low for a very long time, this lead to instamine

let me guess you bag hold vertcoin thinking it will one day pass litecoin.

i don't buy your bullshit though and my point is simply common sense so get what ever you want..

your running a smear campaign on this one coin alone for some reason when many others are the same..
wanna keep running your mouth ?

well i will keep mentioning Prime coin..
address it or hide NEWBIE choice is yours

People this fucking noob that just got here and is an expert with graphs ? hmmmm wouldn't be some other well known asshole with an agenda would it ?
what the graphs don't show is the variation in coin settings the block reward etc so when you compare apples to oranges it's just not fair at all.

edit:
Two key reasons why these mysterious NEW guys have popped up to trash on VTC (while it's getting ignored anyway and its price is falling)
- I have stated i had bought 1 btc worth before so people want to fuck me around and piss me off any way they can (known fact)
- They know damn well like i do it's going up in value soon when Scrypt Asics kick in and the guy is trying to push the price down to buy them cheap.

so for many of my Trolls that have it out for me all the this is a double win for them lol
this is not the first sort of weird random attack topic on it lately and it's odd that a coin that is dropping and getting effectively ignored in favor of Dark coin / X11 clones etc
is such a problem that "Newbie's" need to start smear campaigns against it when no one is paying attention it anyway really.. it doesn't add up at all.

i will tell the truth about ANY coin no matter what ..i get pissed off watching people lie to make money .

+1

That was a lot of rambling, so no, i don't get it.

But you claim Vert was "hit hard" by all the miners.

Let's compare Vert's start to Dogecoins start. Mind you, Doge started and it was not popular at first. It had to fight and claw its way towards $5,000,000 market cap before it really took off.

(oh wait, am i too much of a newb to know the history of dogecooin?   )

From www.cryptometer.org

Vertcoin network difficulty and hash rate, first 96 hours...

http://i60.tinypic.com/m7q9om.png




And Doge, first 96 hours...

http://i58.tinypic.com/24gp2jc.png


Notice how Doge has way more difficulty and network hash rate.

These are quite low difficulty and hash rates, fwiw. I don't buy your argument that because Vertcoin was "hit hard" by the miners, it caused an instamine.

hey NEWBIE stfu you don't know fuck all !
and i am sick of 2 post wonders coming in here like you know ANYTHING.. you don't.

i mine all these things on day 1 and you dipshits ignored me.
your slandering the coin for some ulterior motive playing games.

Vertcoin was no more worse than any other coin end of story and graphs will prove what i just said too
want me to post them ?

any coin that was unique in some way was more popular than the average clone there for they were all hit hard .THE END

do you fucking get it yet ?

or are you on mission to attack VTC for some reason and not listening to reason ?

if what you say is true then it's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay Worse fro PRIME coin and QUARK and and and andandandnadnnadnandnanndnandnandnandnadnnand


get

it

That could not be avoided, it took 18 month for litecoin to reach the hashrate of vertcoin at third month.
So yes 3 month of vertcoin was like 18month of litecoin because of the early release of gpu miner based on exsisting gpu miner and migration of scrypt GPU miner to scrypt-N, but at the end of that migration it cannot raise anymore that much and progression will be linear.
First purpose of this coin is to keep GPU miner that are loosing vs ASIC miner in power cost, the compute power to migrate is just to high too have a linear yeld at the beginning, vertcoin is just victim of his own success with miners.

Pump and dump coins.

Just go to Cryptsy, they have one of the top BTC markets according to my Crypsty dashboard. 64.5 BTC volume should set you up in no time.

Does anybody have any VTC for sale? Looking to buy about 5 BTC worth of them.

Let's see the figures and graphs, eh?

You can't reject the graphs I show because it is something you don't like and ask for more graphs that show something you do like.

Yes, you can design a coin to be mined fast at the beginning. So you can indeed create an instamine. You can also prevent against it. They clearly did not prevent against it. I think that warrants a questioning of their motives.

Since it is only wise to hold large amounts of coin in multiple wallets, I wouldn't try to prove it in the way you suggest.

But you are correct in that I haven't done hours and hours of research against Vertcoin. I don't care that much.

See the bolded part? That is your mistake. VTC currently has 3.5 million coins. LTC has 27.5 million coins.

When you are talking about an instamine 600,000 coins, it depends on how many coins are also in existence at the time of your evaluation. The longer times goes on, the less the instamine matters.

You will understand after this scenario:

Let us say their is an instamine of 600,000 coins of something exactly like Vertcoin in every way that we are looking at now. Except one thing; this example we are looking at has a total number of coins ALREADY in creation at 1,000,000,000.

Since a 600,000 instamine doesn't even measure up to 1/1000th of a percent, that instamine matters much less.

 

Let's be clear where we are at here.

You said, without evidence, that bitcoin was "the most instamined shit ever".

I provided a publicly available source that details the knowledge of coins and their inception, suggesting bitcoin was not. I am not a technical person so I can't prove or disprove it is 100% factual. However, I haven't found a single source that suggests www.cryptometer.org is "fake". The burden of proof is on you, my friend.

At this point, you should work on disproving crypotomter or somehow coming up with evidence that bitcoin was massively instamined.

Firstly:

There was no "intention to creation an instamine coin" - using statistics as a basis *after the fact* to try to justify something is either foolish or idiotic. Plenty of inferences can be made in practically every statistical analysis of any set of data ever.

The fact that 20% of the *current* coins were mined in the period is pointless. Currently vertcoin has 100% of its coins mined in the current period - the current period here being about 4 months just over - an insignificant period of time for you to draw any conclusions from.

Further, those instamines went to how many addresses, and how many of these transactions were then traded and exchanged while the value of vertcoin was significantly smaller than it is now?

I presume that prior to creating this thread, you have meticulously analysed the blockchain, located all of the addresses that these coins went to, and then calculated the total trading and have come to the conclusion that None of these coins have been traded for, and that all coins were infact hoarded by one core individual? (Or perhaps you are accusing the devs of hoarding here, personally I wish they did, Vertcoin is amazing at the stage it currently is, but nope, I'm pretty sure that much like Bitcoin most of the very early adopters traded their coin away before it became anything of significant worth).

This is why I am calling this FUD, as its a partial story, with a nice looking graph.

Lets see the figures, graphs and proof first - that one or two people mined and currently hold this amount.

You may want to use this for reference:

bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-vertcoin-addresses.html

The top few addresses afaik have accumulated their coins more recently.

prove me that those graphs aren't fake

I never want to challenge you. I just apply your very-clever-genius-awesome logic to both VTC and LTC. In Darkcoin scam topic, I compare 2 million DRKs from 22 million darks which is the total supply for Darkcoin. 2/22 = 9%

So, If I apply my logic to both VTC and LTC, both of them will be .6/84 = 0.7%

Sigh.


If you want me to use your own words to prove my point, so be it.

From a Darkcoin scam thread, you said...


So, you apparently believe it's fine to premine 1-2%. Not a universal opinion, but clearly your opinion.


In this current thread, are you trying to challenge me by saying the current 1-2% instamine for Litecoin is NOT okay, after just saying in another thread that is IS OKAY?

 

When someone instamines 16% of the coins, that is worse than a 1-2% premine, btw.

Are you also saying you don't understand the difference between an instamine where 1-2% of the coins in existence is what is being talked about vs. 16% of the coins in existence?


-----


For the record, I think Litecoin was a premine given the facts. Unfortunately, we are 2.5 years after that fact. So yes, calling out Litecoin matters much less. We should still call a spade a spade, but given 2.5 years of existence, I have to admit its more likely that a lot of those 600,000 easily gained coins have probably been sold and resold multiple times. I think peope have less to fear about a massive instamine dump with Litecoin at this point. I still question the intentions of the founders.

Vertcoin has been around since mid January. Call me crazy, but I don't think a majority of those instamined coins have left their hands just yet. I think a lot of investors could get screwed by this, and of course, I am calling into question their intentions.