Topic: XMR vs DRK - page 17. (Read 69755 times)

here's the catch, DASH is a coin like any other coin example: dashcoin....but if you ask them they will say we are not a coin lol

confusion in the is what they brought upon crypto currency market and why not just rename to DASH without buying dashcoin github and paying dashcoin dev to leave the project? Evan said "this project will not continue". it is an indirect way of killing a coin telling the community in a way to dump and leave.

edit: that's darkcoin/dash greatest technological breakthrough turning a coin into a non-coin 

Well, to me it seems like "The Dashcoin community" would have to copyright the trademark both Dash and Dashcoin in that case. I don't believe they did, and if they did they could practically sue Dash I suppose.

We have to remember that this is all community driven, and what's the problem if one coin is called Dash and another is called Dashcoin? It's like Bitcoin would have the right to sue any other coin that is named Bit[whatever]? I really don't see the problem here.

When it comes to open source there are very few rules. The Linux foundation doesn't sue Linux Mint, for example.

The Dashcoin community was not consulted nor bought out properly. 

TDFI (THE DARKCOIN FOUNDATION, INC.) intends to trademark the term 'DASH' and is using Dashcoin and Dashcoiners as pawns in its legal gamesmanship.

TDFI is all about branding and marketing, not tech.  They copy BTC innovations, rename them, and pretend Duffman invented them.

That's how Green Addresses are magically now called InstantX, and so on.  It's all been documented.

I'm not sure you no (sic) a great deal about anything, pal.

Absolutely fair comment and anyone investing in these coins is free to make a value judgement on such matters.

What impresses me about DASH is the innovation of useful features and quiet, relentless delivery. This is the big picture for me, not code commentary or the like. Ultimately it will be adoption that gets any of these coins over the line. Innovation and delivery drives adoption.

There's plenty of time to sort out the finer details. Time-to-market is critical.

What brand theft? I believe Dashcoin(which is clearly not branded DASH) was negotiated with and OK'ed the Dash brand name?

Besides, these crypto"currencies" are really not copyrighting anything, they just copy opensource code and replace the name of it.

We don't know much about THE DARKCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. and its mysterious funding sources, insider trading, brand theft, investment fraud, etc.  But what we do know does not look good.

That fishy lack of transparency is one of the reasons stated by vertoe for his quitting the project.

Now here is a very important point I think you are unaware of, much of the time XMR devs have spent have been on commenting the code. This is a tribute to the dedication of a team that believes in a project even if they in fact are not there to continue. Without proper documentation any programmer no matter how gifted will spend an inordinate amount of time just mapping code before he/she can make a change which is directly proportional to the length and/or complexity of the code. By spending time to make the inherited code readable for new programmers the core team is making their own presence less important as the project progresses.

XMR devs get shit on constantly yet continue to hold a position of professionalism throughout that is staggering IMO considering the mudslinging they endure. If I was working on this project I would have been just stating "Fuck off dickweed" to the unwashed masses that spew forth accusations without a shred of proof to back them up. It takes a special person to answer a retard with no clue with a structured response that is not even condescending. This alone speaks volumes to their integrity.

In contrast this is what I did at work when the director of IS came to my desk to pressure me to get a system working (that wasn't even my responsibility), I pushed away from the desk, stood up and pointed at the chair and asked him in a tone that I'm sure he will never forget "Why Don't You Fix It!". Needless to say he turned around and left me to figure out someone elses fuckup and never tried that on me again.

Having a lean and mean project management at the time critical phase of a project can't be all bad, if the alternative is dragging endlessly while trying to reach consensus on the direction. Middle ground could work as well obviously. These projects are only one year old still.

I'ts a point. Hardly the whole point.

Sure, up to you.

Everyone's free to make their own judgement about his comments, and about yours...

And that is the whole point. 

Since Vertoe was the 2nd or 3rd most important DARK core dev, I'll take his word over your "gold donkey" pumping:

Vertoe does not agree with having a strong visionary lead in a project obviously. And he feels his work was not appreciated enough. That is his prerogative.

Trying to break from the shackles of this small inbred crypto community to the wider world does perhaps require some new thinking. Maybe the just-do-it mentality of someone who is a go-getter and a doer instead of a negotiator and a talker is what's needed.

That's a matter of opinion. He's obviously in a bad place with regard to DASH so his commentary should be measured as such. It's up to you what you make of it...


I resent being called a 'cranky cultist'. I'm making sensible contributions to this discussion, you're just throwing a load of shit around and hoping it sticks.


See what I mean?

It wasn't a "rant." 

But I understand you cranky cultists need to frame it as one, because apostates must be punished.  Why not use the de rigueur term 'disgruntled' while you're at it?   

Vertoe's last post made it perfectly clear DASH is a cargo cult coin led by one man, not any underlying fundamentals.

DASH isn't a technology, or even a brand.

DASH is what Evan does.  No more, no less.  The implementation is the spec.

Vertoe's rant does nothing to address any of the technical arguments in this thread, as any reasonable observer can see.

The only point in your quote is the 'key-man-risk' around Evan leading the project. On that, I would say this is a risk, but it's a risk that many successful projects have faced.

Satoshi was key-man for BTC before others got involved. Other coins have lead devs that are critical to the project.

DASH is also open-source and has other developers on-board.

In the context of XMR vs DRK (that is the thread title isn't it, not 'attack DRK any way you can') I would say that DRK has more key-man risk than XMR, but how much I don't know. How critical is fluffypony to the project, for instance. Also, how much do you really know about Evan & the DASH foundation's succession planning, documentation, contact with other developers etc. Not a lot I'd wager.

Vertoe added some new information to the Cult of the Gold Donkey thread:


Since Vertoe was the 2nd or 3rd most important DARK core dev, I'll take his word over your "gold donkey" pumping. 

Wait, what has your reply to do with the misunderstandings I mentioned? Oh yea, nothing. It's just your need to regurgitate the same old that's been discussed to death already.

Since you're so concerned about masternodes "being compromised", can you explain what is exactly the most important data that the attacker (realistically, only the NSA) would collect?

Same old arguments, ad infinitum.

We should concentrate on adding new information to the thread, either to raise new points or to answer unresolved points.