Quote from: maser82 on September 12, 2018, 09:13:09 PM

Maybe having an easy and functional Marking feature will benefit more the Bitmark price than the CEM or the available algos. Once the users start purchasing Bitmarks to mark documents on the blockchain, then the demand will grow. Most of the users will prefeer purchase Bitmarks than to put their computers to mine or to buy ASICs.

An easy marking and an easy way to query the marked data is the key to put at Bitmark where it belongs (Along with more exchanges having the Bitmark trading enabled).

I would not like to be rude (I do not fully understand all you are talking about the CEM, the algos and their consequences), but you look like perfectionists trapped in the details, without throwing the project forward because it is still not perfect for the next step, when you already have achieved a very very good project.

If you follow the discussion since July, you will see that I was ready to work on a Marking protocol months ago, and one that I think has the potential to bring a lot of user demand. But dbkeys (and some others) wanted to fork, and I strongly opposed it. For now, the fork is not happening, but there is still some things stirring, and if people really want to change the mining system, then at least with my automated system it will happen fairly, with less politics, and no messy patchwork of forks that make the coin look like a joke.

If we can't even agree on such basic things, then who knows how messy it will be now to create the "marking protocol".

As for Monero merge mining, I don't care so much, it can be delayed without much problems.