Topic: Want to know what iGotSpots has been up to? - page 3. (Read 4400 times)
So TLDR: you have another scamcoin. A stake one too! How innovative. Mullick clone this one too?
What exchanges is this coin on?
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
Well for a start sticking to the original cap should have been a given.
Right, I understand that would be nice. But what I don't understand is how that could be accomplished without a way to secure the network by people staking or mining in some way. If there's no reward for those things, there would be no one willing to do that and therefore the network and thus the coin would be dead wouldn't it? So I'm just asking you what those options were that would have kept the network going and with the same cap.
If you can't keep to one of the fundamental features of the trustless system then its a flawed concept from the start, and is a pure pos a secure network?
Not sure what you're getting at. No coin is completely trustless or secure. Oh maybe a couple could be considered that today, but that could easily change "tomorrow". Anyway, I can see you're not actually going to answer the question so I won't bother with this anymore.
You're asking me what other options there are, my answer would have been to stay pow and 2014, you may think that's a dead end option, I equally think the option taken is that.
another option would have been a much lower rate of pos, and fee elimination to reduce inflation (though equally disagreeable imo),
anyway now people are left with trading a non inflationary crypto (ie btc) for an inflationary one....that's cap been changed on a whim thereby completely eliminating trust.
having said all that do I still hold...yes! have I increased my holdings since going pos...yes!
why? because the level of even the most basic understanding of economics or even basic math is so low on this forum one can profit from even the most moronic of cryptos
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
Well for a start sticking to the original cap should have been a given.
Right, I understand that would be nice. But what I don't understand is how that could be accomplished without a way to secure the network by people staking or mining in some way. If there's no reward for those things, there would be no one willing to do that and therefore the network and thus the coin would be dead wouldn't it? So I'm just asking you what those options were that would have kept the network going and with the same cap.
If you can't keep to one of the fundamental features of the trustless system then its a flawed concept from the start, and is a pure pos a secure network?
Not sure what you're getting at. No coin is completely trustless or secure. Oh maybe a couple could be considered that today, but that could easily change "tomorrow". Anyway, I can see you're not actually going to answer the question so I won't bother with this anymore.
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
Well for a start sticking to the original cap should have been a given.
Right, I understand that would be nice. But what I don't understand is how that could be accomplished without a way to secure the network by people staking or mining in some way. If there's no reward for those things, there would be no one willing to do that and therefore the network and thus the coin would be dead wouldn't it? So I'm just asking you what those options were that would have kept the network going and with the same cap.
If you can't keep to one of the fundamental features of the trustless system then its a flawed concept from the start, and is a pure pos a secure network?
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
Well for a start sticking to the original cap should have been a given.
Right, I understand that would be nice. But what I don't understand is how that could be accomplished without a way to secure the network by people staking or mining in some way. If there's no reward for those things, there would be no one willing to do that and therefore the network and thus the coin would be dead wouldn't it? So I'm just asking you what those options were that would have kept the network going and with the same cap.
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
Well for a start sticking to the original cap should have been a given.
Awesome. SPOTS, CPR, TIX are all roaring success stories and remain extremely relevant today. How can this investment go south? You would never steer me in the wrong direction!
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
I'm curious what those options were. I mean with a coin that only has a couple thousand, it's never going to be used for much so there's no incentive for anyone to mine or stake for transaction fees. So other than a high interest PoS, what other options are there that would keep the blockchain moving? Firecoin for example has a "lot" more coins but has a real problem with that and has had to come up with some creative ways to encourage people to stake that coin.
The more miners we get on the multipool, the more payments are sent out. This will result in a lower cap, since all transaction fees on the new chain are destroyed (among other factors) to decrease the rate of inflation
2014-2100 already....inflationary bigtime no?
A small amount of inflation is essential. At 5% we are offering like 25% inflation yearly for 50% stake
essential for what?
I expect about 5-10% will be spread across each large exchange (Bittrex, Cryptsy (hopefully), Bter (hopefully), etc), resulting in a max of 40% being actively traded. Inflation is necessary to ensure long term stakers have an increasing percentage of the market cap while still covering the more spread out supply actively changing hands. This system is built to scale long term, not benefit those looking for short term gains. It will help both types, but our target audience is stakers
The more miners we get on the multipool, the more payments are sent out. This will result in a lower cap, since all transaction fees on the new chain are destroyed (among other factors) to decrease the rate of inflation
2014-2100 already....inflationary bigtime no?
A small amount of inflation is essential. At 5% we are offering like 25% inflation yearly for 50% stake
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
and you think you have security now?
btw the b&tch of a client still losses its balance in the gui as it stakes.
I believe our blockchain to be top tier secure
Let me put it this way. Is it a better idea to invest BTC into S3s and pay electeicity to mine, or use that same amount, buy M, stake it in 24 hours, and have no energy bill?
The more miners we get on the multipool, the more payments are sent out. This will result in a lower cap, since all transaction fees on the new chain are destroyed (among other factors) to decrease the rate of inflation
2014-2121.40343600 already....inflationary bigtime no?
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
there was other options to still keep the promised cap.
btw the b&tch of a client still losses its balance in the gui as it stakes.
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
We had no choice. There was no blockchain security. If people liked the idea so much, they would have driven the price higher and mined for transaction fees. Community voted for 50% PoS
The more miners we get on the multipool, the more payments are sent out. This will result in a lower cap, since all transaction fees on the new chain are destroyed (among other factors) to decrease the rate of inflation
I was buying up (and trading to acquire more) when it was pow with the 2014 cap, got to admitted was very disappointed with the change to pos in the way it did, changing the cap on a whim defeats the whole trustless system idea (something that is lost on so many coins/devs).
All of my resources will be behind it
define what you mean by "Basically, I'm all-in on Maieuticoin." ?
Increasing Maieuticoin's market cap, trading volume, and exposure is now my main focus
sorry I wasn't very clear, I was more meaning all in financially or time commitment to cryptos wise?
define what you mean by "Basically, I'm all-in on Maieuticoin." ?
Increasing Maieuticoin's market cap, trading volume, and exposure is now my main focus
Jump to: