Quote from: vytasz7 on April 11, 2014, 08:50:51 AM

Quote from: swartzfeger on April 11, 2014, 07:36:52 AM

Quote from: dzarmush on April 11, 2014, 03:23:14 AM

What's the obsession with charity? We are not a charity fund. If someone want to spend his money for charity - then go for it, but don't use money that belong to others for it. We need a strong coin and we should spend all available money for development and marketing. I'd better give all money to dev team so they could quit their day jobs and focus on Nem. After all $40-50K spent on development and marketing may increase coin capitalization 10 times and everybody can spend 10 times more money on charity if they're so obsessed with it.

Agreed. Focus on NEM's strengths, and how it can differentiate from Nxt, NAS, etc. Allocate those funds to development.

Charity won't drive adoption, a stable, feature-rich platform will drive adoption.

I dont know but i guess that charities cuold be created on nem exchange ,where anyone could donate when ewer they want .It could attract big publicity

In the UK, where public expenses are highly scrutinized by the general population, there's a growing mistrust with charities which is rightly deserved in many cases.

I, for one, do not think a charity driven plan is going to do a thing for anyone other than make the charities richer - who may or may not even give it to the people originally intended for (Nevermind the fact some charities clearly have a political agenda).

No, I say keep well clear of charities. Use the funds for the development of the currency, and encourage adoption through retailers; especially if it involves the deep web, because we all know, Bitcoins main value comes from black market trade. A coin needs to be feature rich to differentiate from the ongoing horde of clones. But more importantly, a coin needs to be resilient to promote trust and faith in it as a currency -- something that Bitcoin has due to it's demand on more "lucrative" markets.

If anyone wants to push for charities once NEM has reached some solid ground, i'm all ears...otherwise, it's far too early to be even considering it.

NEM has a good start facing it. 3000 stakeholders is a far fairer distribution and it's a one of a kind in that regard, but the start isn't what makes a coin big, It's resilience; an ability to weather the ups and downs of exchange value that the crypto scene entails.