However, many more experience people chimed in and pointed out the other problems that other coins had with Proof of Stake. It encourages hoarding instead of spending as a currency. It causes inflation. People have pointed us to coins like Tagcoin that used Proof of stake and became wrought with technical problems regarding high orphan rates to the point that merchants no longer wanted to accept them.
As for the rest. YES, we want innovation. YES we are open to ideas.
Stop complaining and start helping! PM me for details.
it speaks volumes that you completely ignore the POS coins I continue to name as a good example, pick TAG because some guy in the thread says he knows they had problems, and then TAG is still doing so much better than EAC is doing.
Tag has 4 times the market cap and actually some price not in the one digit satoshi range.
TAG is on 41 in market cap. eac on 68.
BC , pure POS is on 18
peercoin, a success story if there ever was one last year, is at 3.
why do the devs not reply to these arguments, but rather cherry pick some claim by some guy who has been a nonstop all day fanboy of EAC?
cause that guy is a sock puppet of the devs. he blurts out what they think, so zark can "reply", quote him as a "more knowledgable guy" and dismiss the actal examples.
that is called "creating a straw man argument". they have no response to all the successful POS coins, so they choose one example that seems bad enough to support their argument.
yet even that straw man is doing 4 times as well as eac.
---------------------
1) it causes inflation.
nope it doesn't. it STOPS INFLATION.
hours ago I explained why. zark seems unable to eithe comprehend or respond to my explanation.
why is peercoin a shining example of success if "it causes inflation"?
2) it encourages hording.
nope, it does not. again, I have repeatedly explained why. it encourages NOT IMMEDIATELY SELLING IT OR PARKING IT ON AN EXCHANGE.
unless you EMPTY your wallet for every purchase, all your money you have left still collects interest.
and it is let's say 25% a year. who'd be discouraged from buying something with eac cause he could lose a few satoshi interest?
such errors of reasoning are just staggering.
3) none of my arguments is even acknowledged.
POS is bad. that's the extent of your reasoning. "many more experienced people" when it is just one guy telling an anecdote.
the problem eac has is not that people aren't spending it. the problem is that they rather sell it immediately cause they know it is not worth holding.
you use keynsian economics and the idiotic fallacy of spending is the savior for everything and saving is the devil. Hayek is turning in his grave right now and Keyns is having a cocktail party with the devil in your honor.
what you are saying is "I treat EAC like fiat, and make people SPEND IT by forcing inflation on them via a steep increase in currency supply.
BUT IN THIS MODEL SPENDING MEANS SELLING EAC FOR BTC, YOU POOR FOOL.
spending is spending. your economic model does not force people on merchants. it forces them on cryptsy this creates a vicious cycle that you cannot break with using the same "all is fine! go to your homes! nothing to see here" message.
it worked in January when people still believed EAC had been actively developed. but it is not.
and for the love of god, stop saying things like "the team" and "discussed". if you'd up for discussions you'd have actual arguments and not straw men.
if you are not able to understand how POS works, and every post you and your sock puppets do proves you don't, then you should not dev for a freaking cryptocurrency.
Jesus Christ. peercoin is such a success and you are seriously claiming POS would not work for eac???
I am open to suggestions as are the rest of us. I even stated in the very post you quoted by me that my original preference was to to be proof of stake because it seems more eco-friendly, but I am willing to concede that I may not have all the facts regarding POW vs POS. I've stated that viewpoint publicly before. Some people are arguing for proof-of-stake and some are arguing against. Either way, we lose in the eyes of half of the people. And yes, we intend for this to be a discussion, but you can't just shut us down for telling you that we have also been hearing other points of view to the contrary.
If this is to be a discussion, why are you just making ad hominem attacks? And as far as being a dev, I've listed several times what I've done for Earthcoin. My contributions are mostly web-based because that is my particular skill set. I can design and code sites. So I am speaking from my point of view and sharing with you the things that team has discussed and the pieces of input we have from all sides.
I am not unable to comprehend your explanation and my last post wasn't directly responding to your last post because you should notice that my post was not directed toward you. It was a *general update* and response the last few pages of posts and a general update with the team.
Also, you mention sock puppet accounts. Have you managed to look at the post and activity of a lot of the accounts posting? Add that up with our accounts on earthcointalk, twitter, reddit, etc and maybe the post times, and it should become rather evident that it is not one or two guys spending 24 hours a day posting.
You can put up you arguments for proof of stake just as others can voice their arguments for proof of work, but don't get up set when we tell you that we are taking into consideration everyone's input.
And again, if you want things to happen a certain way or happen faster, help out and make it happen and at least be willing to accept that other people in this community might have differing views and experiences from yours.