Quote from: TaylorCZ on March 26, 2018, 06:07:00 AM

Quote from: Amnvex on March 26, 2018, 04:54:26 AM

Quote from: TaylorCZ on March 26, 2018, 04:11:29 AM

Amnvex : It's 5% from the 5% of regular stake you are getting when you have staking enabled. So in result it is 0.25%

That's still a lot. What about the 9 million being staked? That 5% ends up being 180k. You think that's a little? The fact that you can't decide how much you want to donate makes this coin go against what it originally stood for. What's the difference between that and premine?

How did you end up with 180k (for what period)?

Not saying I'm eager fan of mandatory donations, but I understand they need fund just now and I hope (maybe foolishly) that after hard times pass it will be changed back.
I personally set staking donation to 50% because I'm not interested so much in 5% but in XSPEC success. If you like to have 5%, then invest in dividend stocks.
I agree that Mandica should have added promise of reverting it in the future and I was also expecting some really promising news not only this one as most important thing of entire update message. Nevertheless we all want Spectrecoint to succeed, aren't we?
I was not afraid about XSPEC before, despite all those troubles, but now I'm beginning to worry about it. Let's try to find compromises instead of fighting. It includes everybody, even Mandica and jbg.

Hmm, I think I used a lower number than 9 million (it was more like 3.6m, because I misread my numbers based on what I had in my own wallet and then multiplied that number by a few thousand, lol--silly mistake).

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't like forced contribution, period. If this coin were worth more, I'd consider contributing more. But since it is not worth much, I'm contributing less. It's the ethics of it. I respect the developer, but if it's open source, then anyone should be able to work on it and make the project move forward regardless if the lead dev is around or not. This coin has more or less been dead, though. I believe in the underlying tech, however, that's why I stake and that's why I chose to invest.

At the end of the day, my only argument is forced contribution. Regardless of where XSPEC goes, that and how the top is being run are my only two complaints. BTW, if the dev really wanted to get the coin listed, we all could have agreed to put our contributions to 50% or so to the project for a few weeks so that it can happen. But there isn't much community engagement, and the fact that no one is warding off "scam coin" posts just says how little attention is being given to the project. And remember: the more a project is worked on--generally--and the more people want to be part of something like this, the higher the price. The fact that the coin languished from $5-6 to a paltry 50c says that people aren't putting their trust into it anymore. That's obviously very, very bad for the project.

For a legitimate project, there should be no FUD. Trust is built on productivity, not on forced contributions. Think about it alternatively: I ask you to pay me for me to deliver something. You don't know me, you don't know about what I can and cannot do. I don't think many would take such a leap of faith. I'm also risk-averse, in general. That's, again, not to say that this is not a legitimate project. It's the execution, though, that is to be questioned here. Execution...