Quote from: JTB800 on April 28, 2014, 11:41:52 AM

Quote from: mtrycz on April 28, 2014, 10:24:11 AM

If I can throw my opinion in here:

This is a cool effort and I hope it has some success, as there obviously were way too much coins that had good premises/communities but were inable survive because reasons.
Full disclosure: I'm an active member of the PND community and am developing a neat PND exclusive service (check the signature).

I personally hold a (small) amount of GPUC, because I was really hoping in that project, but the dev was really really inept at making it work (don't know if there were any recent news, i just dropped interest now)

Having said this, I can't even comprehend why would you consider PANDA.
If the aim of the project is to revive coins that had GOOD premises, well PANDA was a scam, it had IPO, it had premine, it had wolong, it had it all. I even remember reading a chatlog between one of the devs and a person with a project similar to this one (I've found it! http://pastebin.com/Vr34eE8W, it's located on the official PANDA thread, page 280 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=460037.5580) The devs have NO interest in this.

That problem has already been taken care of, please don't waste your efforts into such a scam, because:
1. Your premises are not met
2. It was a plain scam
3. Should you succeed the devs would dump again.

Just my 0.02 PND

Jonesd added: "It was only proposed by one person, so..."

Yes, I am that one person. But, I think everyone is missing my point. But, first off I would like to say that I was not an investor or a miner or anything else associated with that coin and had never even heard of it until it made the news as the biggest screw job in crypto-coin history. You can even check my posts on the matter (it was awhile ago so you may have to go far back) to see that I was warning people to get out (there were still true believers even after the debacle) after the news hit and no comments beforehand (as I had never heard of it).

I would also like to say, that no one, and I mean no one should listen to a PND investor when it comes to PANDA. The entire reason for existing of PND was to poke a stick in the eye of PANDA holders. They were merciless on the PANDA boards making fun of the people that had believed in the coin. Meanwhile, their coin went to zero as well as apparently hate was not enough to fuel buyers. I have nothing against PND as I know little about it, but theirs is no more a "real" coin than PANDA is. In fact, if I remember correctly it was an exact clone of PANDA. And, let's face it the developers were right about Wolong (who I also had never heard of before the disaster). But to listen to this guy is just plain idiotic as hating on PANDA is what they live for.

The criteria says nothing about "good" coins. PANDA had a huge following and has lots of screwed over investors. The developers were not necessarily lazy (as the front page mentions) so much as they were crooks.

But my whole point was that this group should take on a good "story" coin for its first venture. No story is more infamous than PANDA coin. The bigger the disaster the better for the first couple of coins. Some coin that is solid but a little slow is boring and even if the foundation manages to "revive" it, what's the big deal? Reviving a coin like PANDA, however, would be an epic success and put this foundation on the map.

Now, having said all of that I did NOT vote for PANDA. That would be a very big project and I think that maybe a bit more experience might be needed to take on that debacle. I do not know the people running this thread, so maybe I am underestimating them, but I think that a good medium-sized disaster coin Grin

might be the way to start things off.

It's been disqualified for good reasons. I agree with your opinion with making a good story by reviving a, quote you - "good medium-sized" disaster coin, not the freaking Chernobyl or Hiroshima equivalent in terms of effort and risk, which Wolong's PANDA clearly is.

Why would the foundation bother spending that much time on a coin when there's the following factors to weigh in that clearly affects the effort to reward ratio?

- Wolong's past and current association to the coin
   o People will never let go that he stole hundreds of thousands from the community
   o The coin had not only an IPO (a mega no no) but also a disgusting 3% premine (a super duper mega no no)
   o He has over a billion coins left over to dump the crap out of it and hurt more traders and will give the foundation a bad rep

- Already a direct (superior) competitor with Pandacoin (PND)
   o Started off as a clone yes, but with an active development team, PND is rapidly evolving to rebrand and incorporate new technologies and development to ensure its survival and usage. It has a leg up on Wolong's scum coin already by far with a consistently 400+ mhs and ever growing multipool and upcoming developments this week by inplementing either POS or merged mining with DOGE to remain asic resistant. Market price and volume reflects this superiority very clearly.
   o You call it a clone when it started off, but it was a damn superior clone when it started off with 0 IPO and 0% premine
   o Has the backing of 4chan as the foundations of a growing community.

In the end it was a wise move for the foundation head to disqualify PANDA, as you've said yourself, they should take on a 'medium-sized' disaster coin project to drum up a good story instead of trying to climb bloody Mount Everest solo without any gear or supplies.