Re: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"
...
Unfortunately what did change is that the episode revealed that many in this community, including unfortunately the lead developers, are not committed to the unique attributes of the coin and willing to throw all that under the bus as soon as people start crying about the price. That is a fundamental negative. Ideally they would walk some of that back, but even so the damage is done.
Unfortunately what did change is that the episode revealed that many in this community, including unfortunately the lead developers, are not committed to the unique attributes of the coin and willing to throw all that under the bus as soon as people start crying about the price. That is a fundamental negative. Ideally they would walk some of that back, but even so the damage is done.
I disagree - though I am obviously a bit biased on this issue
There have been talks between xploited and I for months concerning distributed governance.
Likely at least since the idea of larger blocks came up as a widely debated issue in the BTC network.
The process we are preparing is essentially a means to establish support in the same way one would establish support for a soft-fork.
The difference is that our system will allow anyone to initiate the process, anyone to vote according to their stake in the network and have the data available before any development effort is spent on a proposal.
I believe this is a net boon for the network, and hence there is nothing to 'walk back'.
This a double-edged sword.
For instance: consider the conversation around privacy in the BTC network.
Getting such a change implemented into the BTC codebase may very well be difficult given the variety of parties, including governmental bodies, with interests in the network.
This would allow the users of CLAM, purely on their own initiative, to evangelize for such a change and prove the network supports it.
At that point, it does not matter what 'dev team' issues the update/code.
Support has been provably demonstrated, with no permission need.
With support proven, the success of the forking change can be considered more likely.
That is quite important, in my honest opinion.
It adds resilience.
It adds decentralization of development, in a fashion, though crippled at the moment with such a small community.