Quote from: gfigg42 on March 24, 2018, 10:16:03 PM

Quote from: Decker on March 24, 2018, 09:28:22 PM

gfigg42, anyway - currently i see only words, like "we planned dPOW in future", "we will do ... ", "we will send people to Mars" ... in future ... may be ... But on Git - i see only copy&pasted code and bunch of "fixes", hasty attempts to correct mistakes of SAFE devs misunderstandings basics.

And all blames and insults here - don't look good and reduce your credibility among community, at least because these insults against creators of 99.999999999% of SAFE sources. It's better to don't waste time here on "bad words" and focus on your project.

We were focused on our project until their little stunt blew up in both our faces. Since then we have been "focused" enough to accomplish a fork that KMD did not think we could manage. We've restarted our chain, and removed the notary node vulnerability. For now we function as a pure POW coin like 99.99% of the coins out there. Implementation of further features is common in forks and we fully intend to embrace dPoW but in our way. KMD wants new code? They just got some and they're going to see more. Is that enough "focus" for you?

Perhaps KMD could use some of this "focus" on their own coin instead of shitting on a tiny fork coin because they thought we weren't sufficiently bending the knee to our masters? How about some "focus" on what's important to their coin, not their overblown egos. We respect the KMD code or we wouldn't have undertaken this project. We believe it's the best there is or we wouldn't be here dealing with this bullshit.

There may be other vulnerabilities in our fork. We are not gods. Perhaps KMD would be kind enough to point them out to us instead of conspiring for new ways to exploit them?

Edit your thread then to reflect that you are, in fact, not using dPOW and NOT secured by Bitcoin. It's misleading otherwise.