Quote from: DooMAD on October 28, 2019, 08:31:34 PM

Quote from: cryptohunter on October 28, 2019, 06:20:00 PM

distribution

Still haven't changed the record, then? All the altcoins out there which had shamefully gluttonous premines at launch and yet you want to complain about one of the few coins that didn't? I believe this to be one of the most open and inclusive distributions I've seen. Can't fault it at all. Then again, it's not surprising you don't agree with your "unique" perspectives on just about everything. Roll Eyes

You can not fault giving huge swathes of your minting to competing projects because you have perspectives I do not share.

There was no premine for the developer (not huge anyway) but there certainly was a huge automatic assignment of coins to competing project leaders holding btc freshly taken from the hands of dreamers and chancers.

If Tony had blocked those known addresses as I had suggested at the outset then perhaps it would not have been driven into the ground for years on end.

Gluttonous premines are something I have done more to stand against than any other member on this entire forum. I would suggest you research my post history before disputing this. However, a gluttonous premine in the hands of a developer that will remain with the project and use that premine for long term development is still a step up from handing huge swathes directly to competing projects.

Of course a transparent and wide initial distribution is the what most would consider the ideal. I originally believed it was the only way it should be. However, too wide and too distributed with no single group or individual having enough incentive to push the project forward has been demonstrated to be just as counter productive. A large premine that is transparent with a full ledger is not entirely unacceptable within sensible range.

I am not really open to engaging in this particular aspect of BB distribution unless you can provide a specific example of my prior assessment of this distribution or a suggestion for an alternative tweak to the distribution I had previously suggested that you can clearly debunk as being net negative with regard the non stop crushing of this project in terms of market price.

If you can not fault giving huge swathes of your minting to competing projects that is fine with me.I will remain unique in my perspective that the very notion of willingly doing this is ludicrous.

If the development is strong enough and their remains a clear use case for BB then eventually things should balance up to a point where it is not being dumped into the ground to finance other projects (hopefully that stage is near exhausted) or having such huge whales that they can manipulate the markets at will and have no real loyalty or desire to see BB do well.

Not as dishonest as a premine/instamine, perhaps even noble (in a strange way) but certainly not sensible.

Still holding a lot and was still accumulating (until cryptopia took a few hundred GB worth away) so obviously not saying it was dishonest or corrupt. Glad to see it had not been abandoned.