Quote from: cryptohunter on May 17, 2014, 08:22:42 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on May 17, 2014, 07:46:32 PM

Quote from: cryptohunter on May 17, 2014, 07:11:10 PM

Even if i was being hypocritical or even if i was the devil it changes none of the facts in the OP.

There is no if. You were.

As for the facts of the op, they are sensationalist bullshit. OP doesn't even know what he reads, or if he does know what he reads, he intentionally misrepresents it.

I'm talking specifically about the "2 million+ coins to a specific address that I hold" red bolded part.

That was part of the airdrop plan. If the airdrop happened, it would be programmed to create new coins. These would be in a certain address that the dev would control for a period of time so that he could then distribute the coins to those who would receive them. It's logical. OP took that part and misrepresented it that the dev has 50% of the coins, apparently with malicious intent.

Quote

1. it's okay to launch without a windows qt or pools, because some people don't mine at all or know about crypto. Best put that to vote on the main section.

No, I'm saying there is no such thing as "fair". You can define it any way you want, but there is no consensus. Most people mean fair = what's convenient for me.

A GPU coin can be "unfair" for CPU users. A coin that has no mac wallet can be "unfair" for mac users. A coin that has no windows wallet can be "unfair" for windows users. A coin that people don't know about it can be "unfair" (bitcoin) for those who lack awareness. Even electric cost per area makes coin profitable or unprofitable depending where one is mining them - and thus for some it's "fair" and for some it's "unfair" because they cannot participate in mining. It's all extremely relative.

Quote

2. all fast pow mining coins that jump to POS after a couple of weeks are classed as instamine?

Yes they are. Because they are mined during a very narrow window of time, essentially giving the entire monetary base (not a small percentage of it) in a few days (which, compared to decades-long-lifetime of a coin, is just an instant).

Of course that has the benefit of zero inflation later on but someone who discovered the coin a week late can say "fuck this, I have to buy it from bagholders". Absolutely zero chance of mining himself. In this regard DRK is infinitely fairer than any such mining scheme. And it was far cheaper too to buy, not only after a few days, but for weeks and months.

Quote

To me instamine is where the dev team or handful of miners get unfair advantage to mine over other miners at launch and pick up the easy coins in bulk. These new fast POW stage coins are not essentially instamine to me if they are announced and everyone has a fair chance to mine against each other. Where no person gets advantage.

Instamine is instamine, announcement or not, participation or not. It all has to do with the rate of issuance over a given time.

Quote

Let's get serious too, even WC that shit coin version the first dev made had a diff retarget that actually worked to STOP instamining it retargeted very fast. DRK's diff stuck at super low with blocks on super high = steroid instamining powers right there + no competition from windows miners or pools.

Steroids?

DRK's instamine was SLOWER than any instamine of PoW/PoS hybrid. Do the math. 2 million coins in 48hrs. To get to 84mn coins (22mn limit was implemented in March) you'd need 84 days (assuming diff remained the same and 500-coin blocks were issued). Even if I count it with 2mn per day, you'd still need 42 days to get to the 84mn limit. And even if I adjust it to today's current max of 22mn coins, it'd take 22 and 11 days respectively (for a production of 1mn coins per day and 2mn coins per day).

Quote

Nothing you have said changes the facts in the OP.

Read above about the blatant sensationalism bs of the OP.

Quote

Just admit it had a instamined unfair start and that's it. I mean you guys justifying it keep bumping this thread more those do that refute your claims that the instamine was fair or had justification.

This has been covered extensively. The dev himself has said I screwed up with the launch: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/the-birth-of-darkcoin.162/

...If he didn't believe there was a problem why would he ever propose to fix it through the airdrop (which was voted down)? What's more to admit?

Again let's recap.

we differ on what efforts should be made by the dev to ensure fairness at launch of POW.

99% of devs release their coins with a working windows qt and pools. This is seen as fair by the majority of the board. Ask the board about defining fair launch. Put it to the test, open a thread and ask should coins be released with a windows qt and pools or not. I think the answer you get will be clear. Yes life isn't fair but that's just not a good answer. Like you said this is part of why the dev himself offered to do the air drop since he knows it was not the correct thing to do... push ahead with no windows qt and no pools. I told him this before he launched but he didn't listen. If he just wanted to launch on time or if he really did do it to grab up a ton of coins with no competition who can say.

We differ on the instamine...

Although i think some of the pow phases are getting way too short, there is no chance you will convince me they are instamine above and beyond dark. Like i say when WC first hit exchanges and you bought some you were buying from 100's of people, all which were able to mine at the start and had the same opportunity to mine either via pool or solo for a few mins. When drk first hit exchanges you were buying from only a handful of people that instamined all of the easy coins. This to me displays that the instamine (concentrated coin uptake by a few persons including the dev whom had unfair advantage to mine over others that rely on windows wallets and pools) was a serious issue. This again is part of the reason the dev offered to do the air drop. There can be no doubt that 50% ish of all current minting was taken by just a few people.

The fact the dev offered to do the airdrop, and i believe he was serious about it was enough to tell me he was not out just for quick profits but wanted his coin and hard work to go on to something bigger and actually return larger profits long term. The community forced him to go back on that.

But just accept it was a very bad start, followed by more shady slashing of the minting and move on. I guess he's put a lot of work in and perhaps deserves his 10% or whatever he holds. The linux instaminers that grabbed a huge bunch of the loot though got lucky here. I would hate to see other devs making the same mistakes in future.

+1