Quote from: Reece523 on January 03, 2014, 03:02:28 AM

It doesn't - it equates to a worse coin.

It's like saying Myspace provided a better social media experience than Facebook back in the day because it had more users and that it would clearly have to be better than Facebook if more users were choosing it over Facebook. Except many users didn't choose it over Facebook, they chose to use Myspace when there was no Facebook and had all their friends on Myspace so switching costs were high. And then when their friends moved to Facebook and the switching costs decreased, they moved to Facebook as well.

If it didn't take so many blocks for recalibration to occur, it would have been much easier to persuade miners to stick around -- e.g. "CAT isn't very profitable right now but it will be a lot more profitable in 128 blocks so I will help ensure it gets there". Replace the 128 by 2016 and it seems to be asking a bit much of our miners imo.

Quote from: tx42 on January 03, 2014, 02:56:47 AM

Quote from: zerodrama on January 03, 2014, 02:42:05 AM

Only speculators and trollbox wankers want fast times. Retarget should always return to 2016.

I've read almost all 200+ posts in this thread, and no one has explained how 2016 equates to a better coin.

What is the mechanism by which recalibration time leads to

stability
value

Analogies to snow mobiles and milk tankers won't cut it. Give us cause and effect. Better yet, show some math.

He asks for stability and you argue that inviting people with a short attention span who can't commit for a week or two to something is going to bring stability.

Are you serious?