Quote from: 24Kilo on March 02, 2014, 04:16:43 AM

Quote from: lottohasher on March 02, 2014, 04:00:51 AM

I think you have made the right choice to preserve the longevity of this coin. Imo people who don't want to setup scrypt-n are just the lazy type and looking for a quick pump and dump. We as a community and IPO holders want this coin to soar. I support this dev team and the work they have done up to this point looking out for the best interest of this coin.

Cheers

Wrong... very wrong!!!

I was one of the first voices to ask about an ASCI-resistant algo when this coin was announced... and I fully support the use of an ASIC resistant alog... but making this change 18 hours from launch with an untested wallet and coin network... 18 hours for me compile a custom BAMT that uses a scrypt-n cgminer variant... 18 hours to test the compiles and tweak and tune 9 rigs to be sure they are stable at launch... now the pool admins have 20 minute early access to the source code so we solo miners now behind the pools and unable to combat a fork... this is shaping up to one difficult launch.

I am not lazy or a mine and dumper... I only have some many hours in a day and I hold 90% of the coins I mine for more than 3 months... so you are wrong.

If the dev would have announced a scrypt-n algo even a few days ago, I would have no issues. But all these last minutes changes are ensuring that we are in for a bumpy ride.

It seems the dev does not know what he wants for this coin... and it is worrisome that he is making major changes on the fly.

So far a double back-track... pools get source early when he originally announce the no one would get the source early... now he caves into pressure and put another 75M coins into the IPO when only a few posts early he gave a very sound reasoning why he did not want to.

Wrong mabey in your opinion. right in my opinion. People are entitled to have different views.