Code:
1. Download the CLAM Client, below.
2. Find the location of your BTC, LTC, or DOGE wallet.dat file.
3. This is usually the folder: "C:/Users//AppData/Roaming//"
4. You may have to enable "Show Hidden Files And Folders" to see this folder.
5. Replace with your Windows account username.
6. Replace with either Bitcoin, Litecoin, or Dogecoin.
7. Inside of that folder you will find the WALLET.DAT file that holds the private keys for your wallet.
8. Make a copy of this file and place it in your "C:/Users//AppData/Roaming/Clam/" folder.
9. Run the CLAM Client with the commandline argument --salvagewallet (Note the double --).
10. You should see your Clams.
Can someone make images tutorial for this 2. Find the location of your BTC, LTC, or DOGE wallet.dat file.
3. This is usually the folder: "C:/Users//AppData/Roaming//"
4. You may have to enable "Show Hidden Files And Folders" to see this folder.
5. Replace with your Windows account username.
6. Replace with either Bitcoin, Litecoin, or Dogecoin.
7. Inside of that folder you will find the WALLET.DAT file that holds the private keys for your wallet.
8. Make a copy of this file and place it in your "C:/Users//AppData/Roaming/Clam/" folder.
9. Run the CLAM Client with the commandline argument --salvagewallet (Note the double --).
10. You should see your Clams.
That is definitely toward the top of our list "to-do"
Ah, I think I get it - thanks.
Just to check my understanding, am I correct in surmising that there's a bonanza of CLAMs heading out to those people who actually followed the recommendations?
Yes and no. If they left coins in those addresses, and still had them when CLAM did their blockchain dumps, then yes. I use a unique receiving address for everything, but then bundle the coins into other addresses on occasion, so in my case I don't have coins in all the receiving addresses, and wouldn't get CLAMs for those (but I would get 4clam for each "bundle" address that still has coins).Just to check my understanding, am I correct in surmising that there's a bonanza of CLAMs heading out to those people who actually followed the recommendations?
Quote
"as a common measure of security and privacy, it is ALWAYS recommended that users use a different receive address for each payment they receive."
If so, good for them.I think that sounds pretty accurate phzi. Those who use unique receive addresses, as recommended for basic privacy, are likely to get more CLAMS - unless they gather those outputs like you've mentioned, or send funds out, which gathers them in the background.
The good news is; the basic Client tends to attempt to make sends that are "small" and include less individual outputs.
This is because the "larger" a transaction is the more it costs in transaction fees to send.