When you start following ethical academic principles of citing and documenting from prior art, then you will have the high ground. Not until then. Period.
The next post from you better be a quotation from the prior discussion and coherent logic documenting your claim.
Otherwise you are disingenuous.
The next post from you better be a quotation from the prior discussion and coherent logic documenting your claim.
Otherwise you are disingenuous.
The references you cite on the very first page "even 0.1% stake can attack the coin because block solutions are exclusive to some stake holder so the stake holder can delay transactions[1]" are your own prior utterances. That's what passes for academia in your world?
I couldn't get past your second post before feeling naseous. Would you care to expand on the theory that even 0.1% stake can attack the coin because block solutions are exclusive to some stake holder so the stake holder can delay transactions? I would argue that this makes no sense whatsoever[2].
[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13488432#msg13488432
[2] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gibberish