Quote from: Tachikoma on September 16, 2013, 05:22:01 PM

I'm sorry but this pisses me off beyond believe.

I've been spending a lot of my own free time, which I don't have much off, trying to help out this project. I am mostly trying to do this alone since nobody seems willing/able to give proper technical feedback to my theories. Now finally somebody steps forward who sees that something is wrong with my proposal but he wants to be paid in order to tell us what is wrong with it? Why not just specify what's wrong so we can work around it?

I won't be giving this any more energy if this is the way the community is going to respond to a group effort.

Believe me, I know how you feel. This project has forced me to thicken up my skin - people can be very cruel, especially when they are not face-to-face with somebody they are criticizing. I tried not to show it publicly, but I was very discouraged by some of the feedback I got early on.

Let's just ignore it for now. I don't personally see anything wrong with your method, but I figured I'd post the PM in case anybody else knew what he was talking about.

And no, I don't plan on paying to find out whatever this problem is. Hopefully if there is a problem, somebody will recognize it and post it.

You are right that most of us are not able to offer technical feedback, myself included for the time being, and some of those who are able seem to be less than charitable towards us, and/or are opportunistically aiming to extract a bunch of cash from our project funds.

However, there are a bunch of smart people in the bitcoin community, and they aren't all like that. I'll PM some other smart people and see if I can get us some proper feedback.

edit: PMs asking for comments have been sent to Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, Gregory Maxwell, Peter Wiulle, Luke Dashjr, Alan Reiner, and maaku.

Can you guys think of anybody else?

Luke-Jr said:

Quote

Ok, I'll take a look when I get a chance. Not sure it'll be this week, but I'll try to squeeze it in if I can