Quote from: onelineproof on September 10, 2018, 12:00:03 AM

As usual, incompetence walks hand-in-hand with scams. What serious developer would want to work on a scam? And no I'm not using some weird definition of scam. The fork pushed by dbkeys does 2 main things:

1) Transfers wealth from new investors to old investors (total wealth depends on demand)
2) Reduces security for users

and it is advertised as an "improvement"

If this isn't a scam then what is?

The dependence of emission rate on value of Bitmark relative to other chains was never part of the protocol, and it's basically a parametrized if statement:

If wealth of current investors is x, then take 1/x wealth from new investors.

And by current investors I mainly mean the early investors. People who just bought yesterday can still benefit from fair prices tomorrow. The earlier you bought, the more benefit you get from this fork. x would have to be big (market cap of Bitcoin) for 1/x to be negligible, so once (if) dbkeys with his 1 million coins is a billionaire, then the algorithm will allow for an almost fair emission rate (though you can't reverse what is essentially a premine caused by a past unfair rate). This is precisely a pyramid scheme, marketed as a decentralized cryptocurrency.

Obviously dbkeys told his friends to buy bitmarks right before the June fork, and when the price went down they got mad, so he wants to "regain their respect" (together with his own profit). So he thinks that by lying and stealing from other people he will regain the respect of his friends? Good luck with that.

Uncorrupted bitmarks reached $0.30 last week. I predicted $1 within a year from August 2018, so actually I think that can be reached must sooner. With uncorrupted bitmarks, the destination is moon. With scam bitmarks, the destination is dbkeys' pocket, and the amount is dependent on how many fools buy in.

I had some good discussions going on about selfish/colluding mining in the Development and Technical Discussion board (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4998410.0). It is refreshing to talk to people who don't pretend to not understand what I'm saying. Though dbkeys / TeamBitmark did try to brigade it to push his agenda.

So if people want uncorrupted bitmarks, I can work on an exchange solution, but I need your support!

MARK Ops - BlockChain Security & Dynamic Guiding Comm

Many Thanks to the Following Devs, whose Spirit Lives in Bitmark:

in no particular order ...

@82abnmedic
@melvincarvalho
@onelineproof <--- I'm starting to understand your point of view a little bit better, and I think that the current version does deserve a longer run because it has proven succesful.
The last few suggested absolute forkheight I have felt the need to pull the breaks on and avoid because of last minute code corrections and bug catches that just don't feel right .
And I see a point in that perhaps it is wise to leave nearly the full CEM reward (thinking of magic £ 88.888888 % figure) on some merge-mined algos, perhaps up to 3, but to certainly downgrade the ASIC algos by some harsher factor. Don't know ? What do you think ?

@jarr0s
@coinmoon
@dogedarkdev
@ecucoin
@amarha
@mark.pfennig
@docharibo
@luke-jr
@sipa

Many thanks, wherever you are, dear ones, departed dear ones, dear ones to come

Our own Satoshi, Mark Pfennig, little is know of him, more than that he hailed from beyond the wall . . . .\\`

We call our 1 / 100,000,000 unit the Markoshi for him, wherever he may walk today.

A pfennig for his thoughts !

Cheers Mates !

~~~ @dbkeys ~~~

First, let's give thanks that our blockchain is secure, working well, and promptly processing transactions in a very secure way.

We are ready to make the leap into Marking ... inWallet