Quote from: generalizethis on May 12, 2015, 08:15:46 AM

Quote from: stonehedge on May 12, 2015, 08:03:40 AM

Quote from: aleix on May 12, 2015, 07:22:01 AM

Quote from: sgk on May 12, 2015, 07:05:42 AM

I don't have enough details on how this instamine went because I was not attached to this coin at that moment. So it wouldn't be fair for me to call it a blatant scam.
But I wonder what stopped him from relaunching the coin fairly to make things right - and this was a very big reason to relaunch.

So i'm voting for 3rd option:

It was an accident, but it worked out well for him. No regrets.

The funny thing is that, instead of crying all bitcointalk, anyone can relaunch the coin NOW and do it better than Dash! The code is open source!

For some people is easier crying, fudding and trolling instead of doing some work for themselves.

The bottom line is that nobody knows if it was a scam launch or not.

IMO, knowing many of the people around at launch and seeing the volume of coins changing hands for pennies in the early days I personally do not believe that it was a scam launch. It could have been a beneficial situation for lots of people, not just Evan whether the instamine was accidental or not.

It happened. Its not going to go away. The glimpses of evidence that I do have indicate that it was a poor launch that could have benefitted anybody who was around at the time imo.

I stand to be corrected but didn't the person who mined the most coins in the first few days get dropped by the team and dump his coins on an exchange for a few satoshis (relatively)? I forget his name...

@AdamWhite: I have never said you were a Monero supporter.

Still leaves you with two problems: PR and centralization.

The PR problem is simple. Many will not touch an investment that they think had shady beginnings or continues to have someone associated with those shady beginnings at the helm. Dash will always have the same sort of stigma attached to it as baseball players from the Black Sox or home run hitters who needed to juice to pump their numbers (Sosa, McGwire, ect.). The media will have a field day with this issue if Dash ever saw a tenth of Bitcoin's marketcap as will supporters of other coins as long as the coin exist.

The centralization problem centers on the fact that over 35% of the current emission was mined in the first two days. Many will claim that it was cheap and therefore redistributed, but anyone could also claim that these were instaminers moving funds in an attempt to sell the idea of a fair redistribution later--no one in fact can claim either is true, so it's a gut call--but what really hinders dash here is that many investors are not going to buy the story that the coin mistakenly mined 35% of the current value, didn't relaunch fairly when it seemed in their best interest to do so if they wanted to maintain a clean record, but later sold their coins on the cheap as so the coin could be fairly distributed. That's very far fetched when they could have had a provable fair launch and gotten rid of the instamine label in one shot--either Evan is stupid or he thinks there are enough stupid people out there to accept this story. My guess is that Evan isn't stupid.

Good post. I guess time will tell.