Quote from: jamaer on June 03, 2014, 06:53:44 PM

Quote from: FrictionlessCoin on June 03, 2014, 06:43:43 PM

Quote from: jamaer on June 03, 2014, 06:27:33 PM

Quote from: FrictionlessCoin on June 03, 2014, 06:15:22 PM

2c is the current option. 2b and 2d are subsets of 2c.

2b (and 2a) is not a subset. There is a crucial difference between a metacoin and a user definied currency (as explained earlier): a metacoin is not issued (by any entity) and it is trusted by everyone accepting/trusting the protocol itself.

In terms of implementation, it is a subset.

Nope. In 2c) there is no coin/asset (apart from IXC) with a special status, i.e., there are more things in 2b (and 2a) than in 2c. If you really want to see this as a "subset" thing, you can argue that 2c) is a subset of 2b) (or 2a) (with an additional freedom that any asset can be used for bets).

A metacoin is the same as a user defined coin. There is no difference. You can bet with a user asset versus another user asset.

Anyone (IXC foundation included) can chose to distribute a new asset in any way it pleases. Via burning IXC, by paying a fee, etc.

You seem to believe that a meta coin has magical powers... it does not... it just has the same capabilities as any user defined asset.