Quote from: SuperSta on May 12, 2014, 02:47:40 PM

Quote from: Bobsurplus on May 12, 2014, 01:34:32 PM

Quote from: SuperSta on May 12, 2014, 12:58:35 PM

There isn't a super long term plan of many years to be had with any coin aside from Bitcoin so everyone is a medium to short term investor by default. To invest your life savings into bitcoins let alone any altcoin is incredibly risky; I'm not a financial advisor but my 2 cents would be not to do it. There is no coin in the crypto coin world today that is a long term investment of many years in my opinion.

I don't see changing the coins fundamentals as a bad thing. I actually see it as a good thing. It's show me and fellow investors that the developers are willing to keep up with the dynamic and constantly evolving technological world that we live in.

I have said my piece, I hope the developers/promoters know what they're doing, however no one can really _know_ what they're doing, they can just hope their chosen path is the right one.

Lifeforce will still support EMC2 whatever the outcome.

Hey bud,

I'm glad to see that you'll continue to support our coin no matter what outcome plays out. Personally I believe that this coin needs to stick to its roots. Its was born scrypt and it should live as scrypt. I saw you post about other "more secure" algos. Care to give me a lesson on the pros and cons of the other algos you were mentioning earlier in the thread. To me I see it as "if an algo is strong then its strong, wont matter if its scrypt-n, scrypt, x11 or sha 256". They are all pretty unbeatable.

I believe it comes down to perception. It doesn't matter if one algo is actually more secure than another, but if the market perceives that it is, that's all that matters. So if x11 is perceived as being more secure by the market, and scrypt perceived as a weaker algo, that will be reflected in price and value.

Don't forget EMC2 also is a charity coin in a profit-fuelled industry, it's already got its work cut out for itself.

BTW (and this is not directed to anyone): I don't mine EMC2, I provide a pool for it so I'm not swayed by EMC2's algo directly. My views are purely for the future of the coin and should be taken as impartial.

Whatever the developers decided, we will stand by it. I just hope that if they do do something about it later, its not too late.

Except the problem is outside of darkcoin many of the new algorithm coins have not been particularly strong either. I should note, in terms of vulnernerabilities, X11 has a number of them our dev identified for us, one it is hacked together, and the other problem is it is suseptable to botnets. Outside of darkcoin many x11 coins have not fared very well. Again, there is no real compelling case to change algorithms, even in terms of market value or perception. The perception may be coming from GPU miners, not necessarily the market in general. The market right now is in general chasing heavily pre-mined and ipo scams, and in general very short term thinking. There is a high degree of irrationality at this point on the market coming from this short term thinking, and that is the core of the problem, and why scams keep creeping up. This goes beyond the previous behavior coins created to be mined and dumped, which used to be common, but has fallen out of practice with cryptorush failing. In some ways being ethical, and more long term oriented is not necessarily a bad thing.

That does not necessarily mean we should not improve in other ways in both the short and intermediate term. Again, some actually good ideas are coming out of this conversation so far, and I think the development timeline may be one of the better ones.