there is no support from the community to blacklist all PC's and no evidence (at least not enough to make conclusions) that current majority of PC holders have good intentions. it could just be an act to minimize Garzas toxicity on their investment and payroll. actually there was not enough support among the current ruling "elite" about the staking rates of these wallets and compromise of 100% was reached. pulled directly from someones ass, no math behind it

the only people promising dev work are the PC people. you will never get them and/or PC wallets out of the picture unless you have another choice of devs

I was under the impression that anyone could update and fork any coin at any time.   IE I could release a new wallet update that removes prime nodes and removes any remaining "we will not premine"~HG coins.  

If that release gains network consensus or exchange consensus it will become the primary fork and everyone elses transactions will become orphaned.

Unless there was some change to open source and p2p networks recently?  

due to toxicity of the coin the only people left to give it any support (dev, marketing, etc) are the PC holders who JUST made an agreement about 100% stake so they are not going the route of eliminating the golden gooses.

just because you put lipstick on the pig and say HEY anyone can start fork in the spirit of open source, yes thats true but its not reality. network consensus will be dictated by these entities for the foreseeable future. just as was outlined in Mr. Garzas sick mind

 
edit:
im not saying that these people do not have good intentions and maybe they will lower the stake later on. who knows. but for now it doesnt look too good. investing any money before that issue is under control  is a non-starter imo

It's not that simple.

It's not like a vending machine where anyone can walk up and insert a coin, it's like a concert stage where "anyone" can play music, subject to preapproval. Gaining the approval is the hard part. Anyone can attempt to fork, but one of two things has to happen:

1. You get approval from the person/people who own(s) the Paycoin repo on Github to approve your fork, after which all people using that source code now use your version; or,
2. You take the code, change it, and release it yourself. You then have to convince people to download and use your software. Once enough people convert (i.e. consensus is achieved), your software will be the official version.

This means you either have to convince the Paycoin devs to accept your fork (which definitely would not happen if you were trying to take away their ownership/control of Paycoin), or you have to manually convince tons of people to trust your code, download it, and use it. But guess what? Nobody would migrate to the software -- for a multitude of reasons -- mostly because of the fact that the act would seem super sketchy and none of those fucktards would be able to decipher the difference in the code. Compound this with the fact that it will be a direct power play against the current devs (if it weren't you would've just gone through them to make the changes), and you have another clusterfuck of insanity on your hands.

Cryptocurrency isn't as decentralized as you think it is, especially when we are talking about Paycoin.

However, there is one way you could get around this entire system: create an entirely new "Paycoin" community, beginning with your source code. In order for this to work you would just do the second option above and then, rather than convincing the old paycoiners to move to your software, you just convince new ones to join your Paycoin system. This might work, especially considering how many people want the original controllers of Paycoin to die in a pit of fire, but it would still be difficult -- honestly who the fuck would want to deal with Paycoin at this point?

Personally I would advise nobody to invest time, money or effort into Paycoin. There is nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Well I don't know about other people, but I have lost significant respect for your authority as I have seen your views unfold on this debacle. I hold litecoin and viewed you as one of the pillars of the crypto community.  That is no longer true.   (I guess this is the point where you call me a troll again!)

I am quite new to crypto but what TheMage says makes sense to me. Paycoin has no future probably anyway so I doubt somebody needs to fix it, but if they are gonna to try to - his suggestions makes a lot of sense and would be a fair game to everybody if implemented. Edit: you troll...

Gaining approval is easy, it just has to be better than the previous version and accepted by the exchanges and you can force an upgrade by blocking old versions. If you need to upgrade to the latest version to use the exchanges and if you also have new features then you definitely would.

But I'm here just for the entertainment value, we already have PayCon that we can make changes to since we always have 100% approval. ie. If you don't like it, make something better.

How about this: offer any legitimate XPY holder the opportunity to convert into Paycon at fixed ratio for a period of time.  Destroy the XPY as you receive it, and viola Paycoin 2.0.  Of course you blacklist conversions from the coins held in the PCs, as well as any coins that can be traced to a GAW or Garza wallet without proof of payment (to protect the poor fools who ended up buying his dumped coins).

Again: Who gets to decide who is a "legitimate XPY holder"?? Josh? You? Mage? The group that helped Josh pull this fraud? WHO exactly decides. I asked this last night and got no answer. In my opinion having a coin where some self appointed group gets to decide which coins are legitimate is completely absurd and goes against everything that crypto stands for. That is not even getting into the fact that once such an absurd "fix" and the criteria by which "legitimate" coins are determined was declared, Josh and the other criminals who are holding millions of premined XPY would simply wash them through exchanges and such to make them "legitimate". I could easily produce a hundred addresses that I know are controlled by Josh, but that does not PROVE jack shit. If legitimate coin holders consist of an email, I am pretty sure Josh could come up with however many "legitimate" coin holders as he needs FFS. He most likely already has a shitload of those, along with corresponding accounts on the exchanges. This whole fix of stealing coins from the "bad guys" suggested by Mage sounds like another scam on top of the existing scam to me.

AND the way to do that is to have an exchange that has both coins on it. Let XPY holders buy Paycon if they want. If the Paycon group wants to subsidize that, all they need to do is list paycon on the exchange for very low XPY prices.

The reason this coin should just die is very simple.

The moment paycoin 2.0 or whatever "legit, LOL" approach get introduced, everyone will just try to convert to this new paycoin to try dump and get out of this mess.

It will be a continued effort of pump and dump. As we can clearly see from the people who invested on the back of $20 promise, these same people simply got involved to see the coin rise a bit to dump it for a profit. This whole paycoin scam was funded by get rich quick greed investors and operated by the king clown Homero.

The reason why bitcoin lasted so long and grew year on year is simply because it started without any promises, it didnt try to cockgrab anyone with a boner for money.

Over time it simply became a store of money, before then it was an experiment and in many sectors only a fun project to keep your eye on. All these altcoins try and jump on the bitcoin wagon by differentiating themself with various promises to pump the price and inevitably crash the price leaving a ton of bag holders.

To me XPY is very similar to mtgoxUSD , the numbers exist but the value is a fairytale.