Quote from: chrysophylax on April 03, 2018, 06:52:30 AM

Quote from: Under_RVN on April 03, 2018, 06:06:14 AM

Quote from: chrysophylax on April 03, 2018, 05:34:22 AM

Quote from: Under_RVN on April 03, 2018, 05:21:57 AM

Quote from: chrysophylax on April 03, 2018, 04:57:21 AM

Quote from: Under_RVN on April 03, 2018, 04:42:27 AM

Quote from: chrysophylax on April 03, 2018, 04:09:17 AM

Quote from: shiggidy on April 03, 2018, 03:31:08 AM

A new thread was created because the old thread creator (Kai) decided he wasn't going to maintain it anymore. He's moving onto new ventures. So since his account is the only one with access to that announcement, this was the best way forward. The old announcement now links here.

I will be updating this thread for the future. At least it's a bit cleaner now since all the miners with issues are over on the old thread Wink

This still makes no sense.

He hasn't locked the other thread, he hasn't made it public that this is what he is doing and why, he hasn't categorically stated that this is the reason why.

In fact, by doing this, he (and you to a large extent) has made this MORE of a mess than it already is by not doing these things.

#crysx

you know what doesn't make sense? building a closed source miner for 6 months built on top of GPL code and then never hiring anyone to rewrite the gpl code and then sitting on your miner, never releasing it. But hey! that's just my opinion man, just like you have yours.

Well ...

That would be true IF it was GPL code you were talking about and NOT closed source private code.

Which has nothing to do with what we are discussing here - and as a newbie profile, I assume was to just poke in the ribs.

So if it was just your 'opinion' then that is baseless and nothing worth dictating to preach. Base it on facts, and I would establish a rapport and conversation about it. Base it on hearsay and fiction like you obviously have, then I will do the same as I have done now and rebutt only to the extent that you are nothing more than bringer of bad tidings, to do divert the real issue here in THIS thread. You want a REAL cheat when it comes what you have described? Go to the spmod thread and see what you have stated in action CURRENTLY.

We have a ccminer fork internally, and DO optimize it, but never release it. That is abiding by the rules of GPL. You should read the license some day, it's enlightening to say the least.

Nice try as an attack, but a dismal fail.

#crysx

Well ...

It was just a poke in the ribs.

Likewise, it's just your 'opinion' that opening this thread creates MORE of a mess(subjective) and to ascribe any fault or actions of the previous thread owner to this thread is baseless and nothing worth dictating to preach(in your words).

Best of luck with your internal ccminer fork and CWIgm

Nice try as an attack, but a dismal fail.

#under

Reminiscent of a user who is on the forums trolling/posting on another profile that is argumentative in every way he can be.

So this is the 'new' profile you intend on using mate? Good one. Shows the gutless means that you decide to take.

In any case, your attack is moot. OUR code is just that, and we can and will do what we want with it. Period! The GPL code is restricted and governed by the licensing, and 'should' be adhered to buy the rules that govern it. It doesn't always happen that way. Why don't you accuse MicroSoft that their OS is based on opensource software and that they are using it internally, but publishing it also. I'm sure that will go down well.

As for the RVN threads. Notice - THREADS! With an 's'. This is the 'mess' that I am talking about. Unlike the use case where a single thread is used by the current owners/developers/users, multiple threads that are used at the same time on the same subject is messy. This not subjective, but factual. It is EASY for the last owner of the thread to have published that post - then lock thread. Explaining that there is a new thread because I have other projects I am working on. Simple.

You on the other hand, seem prefer to have multiple threads on the SAME subject, so good for you. The general populace are those that really shouldn't be misled this way, and need to be directed by the DEV TEAM who control this project, as to which is the correct method and direction the community should or should not take.

#crysx

Stop chasing boogeymen in shadows that don't exist!

I'm not your nemesis masquerading in a new account, I'm just a person new to bitcointalk.org

I really don't care about your code that much, but man you sure get pretty defensive about it.

I was simply making a metaphor about how personal opinions, exclusively your negative one about THIS thread, can be subjective.

Furthermore you seem to put a lot effort into prescribing the 'correct' method for establishing ANN threads. I understand that it is your opinion that ANNs "need to be directed by the DEV TEAM..." I would counter that centralizing all communications under a single authority is completely counter intuitive to the nature of decentralized blockchains. I am curious where Bitcoin's ANN thread is? link pls? (joking)(because there isn't one single thread owner for bitcoin)

So community communication will get messy sometimes in a truly decentralized project. But this thread is an attempt to clean things up- and your insinuations to the opposite are baseless.

No - not that way at all ...

I have endured way too many issues with arguments over so many things - regardless of whether you give a damn about our code or not. When someone wants to argue and a point, or accuse of doing what Rune Stensland (sp_ in this forum) is doing like you have done so in the first post, then I will ALWAYS get defensive if no such thing has occurred. So regardless of what your intention is/was, you accused us of something we have no intention of allowing to follow through with. That is why I get defensive, and why I continuously seem to defend our stance. Posts like yours make it necessary.

Other than that, opinions are just that, opinions. Metaphor or not (which it clearly was not - it was a false accusation), the fact remains that a single unified thread would cause NO confusion as opposed to multiple threads on the SAME subject matter. Maybe I should say 'active' threads instead of just 'multiple' threads. The 'old' thread is still being used and is current, while this thread is also being used and apparently current.

Why is it that the other one can't have a post to say this is the new thread and have it as the last post with the locking of the thread? Too logical to do?

Anyway, I guess we will be going around in circles with this as you seem to think there was no accusation and merely a metaphor with what you accused us of in the initial reply post, and you still think that it is all subjective here with two threads on the same subject by supposedly the same people.

No worries.

Have a great day!

#crysx

Your accusations about THIS thread "(and you to a large extent) has made this MORE of a mess than it already is by not doing these things" initiated this.

I don't understand why you felt the need to sling salt on this thread. I slung some o' that salt back.

You do ask a valid question though, "Why is it that the other one can't have a post to say this is the new thread and have it as the last post with the locking of the thread? Too logical to do?"

But this valid question should be in the other thread and directed to the thread owner.

So moving forward,

Best of luck in your endeavors - lets get back to the topic of RVN!!