Quote from: secoccular on April 03, 2019, 02:46:16 PM

Quote from: GaryH on April 03, 2019, 01:31:47 PM

If we're to grow, things need to become easier which means older non-computer users from church would be able to download BBP and the system would configure itself and it could alert them a new wallet needs to be downloaded etc. I think BBP scares a lot of users off with all the tech/configs and acronyms.

My opinion is we're gonna need to make it easier for users to come to BBP.

Interesting, I was just having a conversation about this, and the conclusion was the same as yours. Crypto is hard enough to understand and mess without the constant change. It's easy to forget how people outside this crypto world don't have endless amounts of time and energy to research all these changes and troubleshoot. It's easy to forget how intimidating all the jargon sounds. Or maybe we want to show off our intelligence and pride to impress the non-technical folks, make them really work hard to stay current on this coin? BBP may require more work to set up and keep running with all its changes/upgrades. We should be honest that it just requires more effort, good or bad. And then we shouldn't blame Rob for constantly innovating, and we shouldn't blame the coin for not being more popular.

I recall Rob saying a while ago, that BBP is really geared towards tech-savy Christians. Rob, if I have that wrong, please chime in with what the target audience is as you see it. If it is really more for technical Christians who enjoy spending time on github and doing testing, then BBP is actually a complete success. That is, it's appealing to that small group it's intended for.

If it's designed for anyone interested in charity and Christian values, then I feel we may be missing a good bit of the core audience.

Well I believe this is exactly why all the change occurred over the last few months. We adopted PODC as our holy grail originally (when we believed it would root out the rich botnets), and then I typed a whole page of information in the OP post of the POG voting thread as to why I believed we were too complicated for the average user, and then we voted to move to POG because of this, so we could implement a no-configuration system miner, and mine with zero setup (IE turnkey mining).

We almost succeeded in that next release, and then we had a bug in production in POG that caused me to temporarily move us to pure POBH.

My opinion has not changed, I still think PODC is too complicated of an animal to run as the single algorithm, and I think we are a light year ahead once we release the ability to mine through campaigns *or* through POBH. (As either one can be automated in our setup wizard).

I'm very close to creating a document with a grid in it (similar to a roadmap, but different in the sense that it will be comparison based) and this should paint a picture of where I think we were, we are, and where we are going and Ill be sure to include ease of use on this grid so we can see if there has been an improvement in this area.

There are dimensions and dynamics involved in every decision. I am going to explain why I think we are a light year ahead in our new position in testnet.