Quote from: child_harold on June 10, 2015, 08:03:19 PM

Quote from: GameOfCoins on June 10, 2015, 07:33:46 PM

Quote from: child_harold on June 10, 2015, 07:18:20 PM

Quote from: GameOfCoins on June 10, 2015, 07:09:44 PM

1) The technology is first of all open source. Like all open sourced projects anyone is free to review the system to find and/or exploit any vulnerabilities which in turn makes the team respond with a fix. We don't need anyone qualified to tell us that this will lead to the project getting stronger. The project is also built on a proven platform (Bitcoin). Unlike cryptonote, Bitcoin has been under the microscope from pentesters for many years now. When SDC gets into the limelight it will be under the microscope just the same. I have no doubts that the project will have numerous reviews come out for it.

2) The original authors of cryptonote also contacted the SDC team about reviewing ShadowSend. After 3 months of back and forth they asked for more documentation.. If this was just a clone of cryptonote as some clone developers have said I would think the original authors of the cryptonote protocol would be able to point that out instead of asking for more documentation. If anything it sparked their curiosity and appreciation of the work here to ask for more info. The fact the both reviewers asked for more information is also a sign that it is needed but not a priority over the marketplace. Commerce drives value in a currency much more than speculation.

Honestly, I think that you should dump the rest of your holdings and move to a new project child_harold. I don't think you have the skin to be a long term investor. Your public outcries show a lack of maturity and also a lack of reading comprehension. The team has stated numerous times that they decided to dedicate their resources to building out the marketplace instead of documentation. CRZ- started working on the marketplace design towards the end of October so this has been in planning well before any review of ShadowSend. The decision was to postpone development work for docs or begin backend development and the coverage by Motherboard of the SDC marketplace progress made that decision simple. Obviously our team would like to focus on documentation not just for the review but also to bring in contributing developers. The priority right now is finishing up on 9 months of front and backend development.

If the code is open-source and open to review why does evreybody want more documentation? Clearly the code on it's own does not appear sufficient.

I am insulted and hurt you want me to dump the rest. You commissioned the review and YOU raised expectations (at least mine). We all play our parts TrollsRoyce.

You are a disgruntled investor insulting the development team (SDCDev, Tecno, BaS, DaSource, Crz-, Ludx) by posting childish (no pun) threats and ignoring their decision to focus on development instead of documentation. For the amount of hours they put into this project and lack of community donations for their efforts relative to their potential income elsewhere, it's the last thing they need to deal with. If you dumping the rest of your holdings means less stress for them then I believe everyone here would approve. In the last 5 months the project has more than quadrupled in value and yet here you stand bitching and moaning about making a profit. Crypto is the only place in the world where profiteers will insult/threaten the people making them a profit. In more traditional markets they would be praised and possibly even receive a commission.

I have nothing but respect for the Team and rynomster in particular. He is genuine and real, unlike you who metamorphoses more than a Greek play.

Answer my Q: If the code is open-source and open to review why does everybody want more documentation? Clearly the code on it's own does not appear sufficient.

ShadowSendv2 is not understood and it should be. I will hold my peace for 3 weeks but everything you're saying indicates the report will not be ready

@SDCDev : u know I'm sound. Fuck 'em. All the best

A code audit and a protocol review are two separate things. One involved meticulously going through code and checking dependencies unrelated to the actual privacy technology (something I don't think 5BTC to any level professional will cover). The other is a review of the protocol by itself based on the information provided through documentation and partly for code referenced in the white-paper not the codebase in its entirety. The proposed reviews from cryptonote authors and zuener were based on the whitepaper provided by the SDC dev team with whatever code was referenced in it. One I might add that was rushed out due to pressure from disgruntled profit seeking investors like yourself.

"Where's the WHITEPAPER? Huh

?" was the same mantra being constantly chanted by similar investors. Now that mantra is back in a different form.

IMHO, the whitepaper could be revised to include more documentation but as I have stated priorities have shifted over to finishing up 9 months worth of frontend and backend development on the marketplace. The original bitcoin whitepaper wasn't that documented but reading whitepapers like the zerocash one and comparing it to Shadowcash's one can quickly see that it could be far more in-depth. Granted the zerocash whitepaper came from high level cryptography/mathematics professors/academics who either directly or indirectly are paid by a fund or university to do research and development work. Those projects aren't a community driven project like this one where the developers and contributors work solely off of donations.

You think you have respect for the team but in actuality you are just another skip60. Nothing better to do than post bullshit here and start bringing negative attention to the project instead of contributing that energy to help the project out.

Quote from: volyova on June 10, 2015, 08:02:59 PM

"Concentrate on development, instead of documentation" Huh

Sounds like more stalling BS to me...

Do you even know the difference between the two? One involves writing content for a select few to READ, COMPREHEND while the other involved writing code for software that everyone can USE. What is more important?

Quote from: skip60 on June 10, 2015, 08:54:00 PM

Quote from: systh on June 10, 2015, 08:49:38 PM

Quote from: skip60 on June 10, 2015, 08:44:28 PM

haha we saw what happened to people who donated for the Zeuner review, you fucked all those people

i dont have a single reason to trust and donate

If you don't trust Shadow, what are you still doing here? Why have you invested in it? Honest question. Seriously.

i wrote it above

.....the truth is there is potential with this coin,but people who re strong at this community are playing "dirty"

that is the problem here, they manipulate the price and dont want many people with them as an early adopters

and that is the reason for lack of trust

Skip60 you have bipolar disorder when it comes to this project. One minute you are spreading baseless accusations, the next minute you are praising the chart movement. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Just because you post yours here doesn't mean its worth anything.

---

My proposal is this: If you want the team to stop working on the marketplace, Android and iOS and to shift their attention to writing up documentation for the code let's have a vote either here or on shadowtalk.org. If the entire community thinks that postponing the release of the marketplace in place of in-depth documentation, then I'm all for it. While we are at it let's also contribute funds to SDCDev, CRZ- and the rest of the team because if we are going to dictate what they should and shouldn't be doing with their project time and question their development efforts then we should be paying them.