Quote from: smooth on November 20, 2015, 09:13:35 PM

Quote from: dooglus on November 20, 2015, 09:08:35 PM

The developers gave a fixed amount of CLAM to every funded BTC, LTC, DOGE address thinking that that was the fairest way of doing things.

This seems like a straw man. Maybe they thought it was the "fairest" way to do things but that seems somewhat implausible. Does "fairest" even exist?

More likely they thought it was a way to distribute coins to a very wide swath of the cryptocurrency community. I doubt seriously anyone believed that some participants with very large numbers of addresses wouldn't exist, but by distributing to every non-dust address that meant that at least some meaningful number of coins was being distributed to each of a huge number of participants.

If they did believe there wouldn't be people with many addresses, well I guess you can't deny stupidity.

As far as "fairest" goes, it seems relative. What are the options when you're launching a coin, is it essentially pre-mine, pre-seed, or everyone starts with 0 and it's a race to acquire? In a landscape littered with worthless alts, that last option isn't helpful because you can't attract an audience to yet another new coin if you don't stand out, so you need something that grabs attention and widely distributes from the start. Pre-seeding seems like a logical answer because pre-mined coins always carry the stigma of being pumpers for the developers, and pre-seeding at least gives you wide distribution in a more fair fashion. Naturally, the unintended consequences of that have arisen. Whether or not they could have been foreseen isn't very important to me, unless you're making the argument that the whale digger is also a developer, and manipulated the system for his own gain. The goal was wide distribution in as fair as possible a manner to give the coin a running start, and I would say it worked because it got Doog's attention and earned a place at JD, which is the only catalyst so far to give it actual value.

When thousands of individual diggers dug and sold their coins for the free btc, it was a "good thing" because it helped distribution, in spite of the fact that unwanted coins were being thrown into the market, which would suggest to me a flaw in the distribution model. But no one was protesting that then, or worried about coin inflation or the affect on price. But now we are, and it just happens to be because it's one guy who lucked out. Again, if you're making the argument he gamed the system, that's an entirely different issue. But if you're just upset by his dumb luck, that arbitrary double standard bothers me.

Quote from: dooglus on November 20, 2015, 04:47:28 AM

When he's done selling, someone else will (eventually) start. There are another 14 million or so undug CLAMs out there.

Doesn't follow logically. Someone might start, or someone might not. It's not a given, for one, and if the potential undug CLAMs didn't bother you 2 months ago, why do they bother you now? No one cared at all about all the potential undug CLAMs until they had to acknowledge the error in their thinking that no one would ever dig those CLAMs.