Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

I am not going to defend the DEVS -- but I will offer a different perspective.

POT is not just another flash in the pan coin that will be gone in a few months. Its a real team, with a business plan and focus on bricks and mortar usage. This is a VERY unique and unusual thing in the crypto world (most are created by devs whose entire purpose in to pump and dump and walk away) With the zillion other cryptos out there, you can't achieve adoption without focus and business like mentality.

What business plan? They went to the 420 event to get high and hang out. Having a true plan would have meant they would have been dressed professionally and had media kits to hand out to vendors.

And this whole approach isn't rare... it's the goal. Create a currency and have a legitimate use for it. Fuck, man... take a look at NLG and see what they've succeeded in doing in half the time of POT. POT has been around for how long now, and it's still working on the broken promise that it will be the industry standard. There is one dispensary taking the coin, but they aren't even taking it for POT. Hell, I even asked if there was any incentive to take POT at the dispensary on the 28th, and what happens on the 29th, they offer a 10% discount on merch. I'm not saying I was the reason for that, but rather that should have been thought of from the get-go. There is no planning...

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

Yes, I agree -- this entire discussion is the equivalent of a premine after the fact -- but with so many in circulation, decreasing supply is not a bad thing.

We just decreased supply, or did you forget what has been going on for the last month? Do we really need to decrease supply even more?

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

Coins are a commodity. Real companies that drill for oil or mine gold, do all they can do to manage and hedge the price. And do what ever they can do to make more money. We all would like to see POT at a higher price and we all would like to see more adoption -- I believe adoption and price are connected much tighter than most consider.

Actually, the people here have been talking about adoption. I just mentioned it. Hell the dev even said that the reason that they wanted the halving was that there was too many coins and not enough use for them. I think people have considered adoption as the weak link in the chain for this coin for a long time.

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

Meaning -- if POT was valued at even $1 USD... the payment structure simplifies and it takes fewer fragmented transactions to actually purchase something, which means easier processing for vendors and customers. Moreover, perception changes. POT would be seen as viable ... 1-to-1 for real dollars and usable for real transactions.

1POT:1$ would mean that the "Foundation" has $588k in the donation wallet. I don't think they need more unless things seriously start to change with the adoption.

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

In the end its supply n demand. Right now there is too much supply. Most people here only focus on on the demand side- so lets talk on the supply side. I think you have to ask yourself the question --- "If this was my business and I wanted to manage and control supply - how do I accomplish that?"

Wrong. In the end, it's adoption. You're contradicting yourself now. Make up your mind, mate.

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

1) POT run or managed POOL - lots of configurations here are a couple - could be a multipool that mines other coins and pays out in POT -- could be a pool with high hashpower that just mines POT for the "company" In any case it has the opportunity to take coins out of circulation -- decreasing supply.

2) Buy POT directly from the exchanges to support/increase price. At the time of this writing -- I could have bought 100% of the volume from Cryptsy for 6.4 BTC -- around $4000 USD -- its not a huge market. Not that it would make sense but if someone did buy 6.4 BTC -- where would the price be? If my math is right, that's over 600K coins and in any case -- it would decrease supply.

3) Trade POT on the key exchanges ( in the trading world this could be akin to market making ) This activity by itself should stabilize the price and flatten the peaks and valleys. It happens all the time in equity, FOREX and futures markets.

Again... this should have been in the "business plan". Right now the only plan is "Use POT to buy stuff".

I support ASICs backing the blockchain. DOGE has a good plan in this respect.

As far as buying POT goes, sure... spend the $4000 on the POT to buy everything on the market. But what happens after that? You need constant pressure on the market. TAG was able to keep the floor at a specific price because the millionaire owner of the coin was keeping it up. He was actively buying TAG constantly, and still is. But you need the revenue to do that.

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

4) Remember, cryptos almost always carry a "network transaction fee" for sending it around network. So, in concept this is not a new thing. I am not sure the exact usage of the above stated "tax" but consider this -- an additional fee that is assigned for transaction above a certain threshold, XXX BTC would only impact big pools and pumpers/dumpers that are manipulating the price by buying and selling large volumes. This would cause them to either pay the "tax" of make smaller trades on the exchanges -- smaller trades would be eaten up by the general market and price would swing less. And if they choose to make the big transactions, rather than fight it directly ,,,, make money from it.

A transaction fee is minimal. What is it, 0.001-0.01? And in the end the fees go to the miners that make the transactions happen. A 2% fee on top of that is absurd. Until verified, it's not on transactions over a specific threshold, it's a on all blocks.

And again, you're not making sense. You say that the "foundation" should create a pool or buy up the pot on exchanges. Then you say big pools and people who manipulate price should be taxed. So you tax the taxer? In programming terms, you just found a memory leak.

Quote from: deanpreese66 on June 12, 2014, 02:28:39 PM

Unfortunately -- we here are the geeks (I am part of this group and freely admit it); people in the early adopter bleeding edge of this movement. As a result we nitpick and over think every movement and twitch and in the world of always on, the lack of movement is perceived negatively.

The average person does not care and never will - they want function. How many people really care about PayPal fees? Customers don't because in the end, it just works. This movement, legalization, POT -- its not about the geeks (the minority) -- its about the majority. The majority will make this successful and thrive. That majority just want it to work.

And you're back to adoption. Man, Dean... that was a rollercoaster.

-Fuse