Quote from: binyao on June 23, 2014, 05:08:07 AM

Quote from: Jacqul on June 22, 2014, 10:11:27 PM

I would like to summarize the criticism as far as I have seen it:

1. B instead of S as first letter.

Silkcoin has responded and said it is something that does not really matter and that they did not feel warrants so much attention or concern.
Cryptodevil has said that he worries this means that there are bigger problems that are overlooked.

My take on it:
Silkcoin team have been focused on the bigger picture and ignoring some details (some spelling and grammar in the wallet also) and I can see the B thing slipping in.
I have warned them that the devil is in the details and that people will respond with concern like Cryptodevil did.
I also submitted an edited version of some of the info included in the wallet.
This they implemented in the next update. This acceptance of feedback and response to the community was very much appreciated.

An actual error did appear in one of the earlier wallet updates (having to do with block number causing a crash in wallet) this was immediately responded to and fixed by the team.

2. The White Paper.

Various people have been unhappy with the layout of the white paper and that it did not seem to come from someone used to writing them.
Silkcoin has responded and said that this is in fact true, they are not used to writing documents like these. There was also time pressure and they wanted to deliver the outline of the plan with the ecosystem. An updated version is promised.

My take on it:
This is also in keeping with (1), the dev team is working on the bigger picture and letting things that seem inconsequential slide by. Unfortunately for people who do not understand the technical vision, all they have to go on is the impression of professionalism that is given by fancy websites and flawless papers.
I prefer that they delivered a white paper as promised rather than delayed it to polish it.
I feel it contained the ideas as they said it would.
Nobody has yet really delivered any negative comment on the actual content.

3. Silkcoin wallet is based on Blackcoin.

Silkcoin team have said this is true.

My take:
Who cares? Everything is based on other things. Blackcoin is based on Bitcoin etc etc etc.
If you see how many other wallets are now copying SC wallet and how accepting the devs are of that fact
(and confident that SC will stay ahead because of ongoing innovation),
then you realize that they are happy with open source, using and referencing other wallets and ideas.

Of note: cryptodevil was worried that the B/S substitution happened directly because of this fact in contrast to the response from the dev
Cryptodevil also says he was asked to stop posting negative things in the thread. (Please see the next point.)

4. The FUDstorm

There is convincing evidence that MEGAman/fat mike/gorilla jam posters are part of a group or sockpuppets of an account
that is delivering on a promise to derail the SC thread after failing to extort 0.5 BTC from the dev team.
The dev team has responded calmly and carried on, which inspires confidence.
The concern is always that trolls manage to derail or anger the dev team enough that they withdraw,
this has happily not happened and in my opinion is why you need a team of dev rather than just one dev.

A new community self moderated thread has risen in response to the extortionFUD but there are problems with that as well.
Unfortunately the side effect of serious trolling is that it galvanizes the community and creates mindless yes-men who want to protect their investment.
This is not always positive and we need to be vigilant to this. Too much hype can kill something as effectively as too much FUD.

My take on it:
SC dev team have managed this as well as possible.
The problem is now that with the extortion, everyone is sensitized to criticism and wonder if negative comments are part of the same FUDteam.
Hopefully responses can be tailored to specific criticism (as in the Cryptodevil case) and not all criticism criticized for being critical.

5. The 4.5% premine

Initial premine was planned at 2% but there was lot of early pressure from community to halve the second POW payout and so give earlier investors more incentive.
The payout was halved, so dropping the total number of coins created and hence raising the % of premine.
There has been some in community asking for premine to be destroyed and some strong reactions against this.

The obvious concern with the premine is that devs could desert the initiative and sell off their share and so crash the price.
It is obvious that a lot of work has already gone into creating this coin and that a lot more work is planned.
I for one would hope that devs become rich from this venture but only after enriching the world by delivering innovation and creation.
The addresses containing the premine is public and movement of the funds can be watched.

My take:
I see a need for a dev fund. I don't see fundamental difference between 2% and 4.5%.
I hope the devs also bought or mined lots of SC on top of that fund.

TLDR:

Valid criticism to dev attention to detail but important things have always worked or been fixed immediately.
Some details have not worried the dev team but it does worry some in the community. (Community participation can help to fix details.)
There is ample evidence of dev team competency, just look at the wallet and the fact that others are now copying SC wallet.
There is a vision contained in white paper that could change wallet functionality.

Disclaimer:
I own some SC but not enough that I will be able to retire if it is $10 per SC.
(I plan to keep all of them until I can used them without turning into anything else.)
I am bullish on SC and think that it will increase in price.

I totally agree with you. For Chinese readers, I translate it...

这个人说得很有道理，对于中文读者，我做了一些翻译。大概意思是这样：

对所有我看过的谣言和批评我做个总结

1。关于地址首字母是B而不是S。
Silkcoin官方回应,说它是真的并不重要,他们觉得不用太在意。
Cryptodevil曾表示,他担心这意味着有更大的问题被忽视。
我的看法:
Silkcoin团队专注于更大的远景,忽略一些细节(也包含钱包上的一些拼写和语法的错误),我也看到了关于B的问题造成的一些下跌。
我已经警告他们,细节也比较重要,人们会回应关注像Cryptodevil一样。
我也提交了一份关于钱包的细节错误信息和我修改好的版本给开发组。
他们在下个版本的钱包更新中会修正这些问题。他们这样接受社区的反馈和意见的态度是非常值得欣赏的。
一个实际的程序bug错误也出现在一个早期的钱包更新(与块钱包中引发崩盘)，但是这立即就被团队解决了。

2。白皮书。
很多人对白皮书的专业性，学术性和排版等感到不满意
Silkcoin团队回应说,这实际上是真的,他们不习惯写这样的文件。由于他们想早点让社区知道ecosystem的详细信息，所以由于时间的原因，他们没有写的很专业，27号会有更新的白皮书版本，其中会添加更多细节。

我的看法:
这也是符合(1)中的观点,开发团队正致力于更大的远景,这些真的不怎么重要。不幸的是,对于那些不了解的技术的人,吸引他们的往往是否专业,是花哨的网站和完美的论文。
我喜欢,他们做为承诺，发表了一份白皮书而不是推迟它。
我觉得白皮书包含了他们想要表达和将要实现的想法。
目前为止还没有人就白皮书的实际内容做出什么负面评价。

3。基于Blackcoin Silkcoin钱包。
Silkcoin团队说这是真的。
我采用的方法:
谁在乎呢?一切都是基于其他的事情。Blackcoin基于比特币等等等等。
如果你看到有多少其他的钱包现在复制SC钱包和开发者如何接受这个事实
(相信SC将保持领先地位,因为持续的创新),
然后你意识到他们满意的开源,使用和引用其他钱包和想法。
注意:cryptodevil担心B / S替代直接发生,因为这个事实相反dev的响应
Cryptodevil还说,他被要求停止在线程发布负面的东西。(请见下一个点。)

4。关于谣言
有令人信服的证据,MEGAman/fat mike/gorilla jam是一个组织，或者是同一个人的多个账户。
他们曾敲砸SC团队0.5个btc，用来让他们停止散播谣言。（MEGAman在另一个币中亏了，想通过这种方式赚币）
开发团队很有信心的没有理会他们的敲诈，而且把他们的敲诈公之于社区。
造谣者们的关心的总是设法破坏或使开发组愤怒，从而达到他们的目的，既为了使他们撤回谣言而满足他们的要求。
一个新的为了应对谣言的社区帖子已经开启并有不少人参与。
不幸的是，这些谣言确实刺激社区向不好的方向发展，也吓跑了不少人。
这并不总是积极的,我们需要保持警惕。太多的炒作或者过多的谣言都可以杀死一个好币。

我的看法:
SC的开发团队已经尽力做到最好的管理了。
问题是现在,敲诈勒索,每个人都是敏感的，只要是批评和怀疑的意见，人们就想这些人是不是和造谣者们是一伙的。
希望社区保持理智，区分善意的批评和恶意的造谣。

5。4.5%的预挖
初始预挖计划2%,但有很多早期的来自社会的压力将第二个POW数量减半，为了给早期投资者更多的激励。
股息减半,所以金币的总数下降，,因此提高了预挖百分比。但实际上预挖的百分比一开始是按照1亿的总量来算的。
有一些在社区要求premine对这个被摧毁和一些强烈反应。
显而易见的担忧与premine是沙漠,开发者可以主动和出售他们的股票,所以价格崩溃。
很明显,很多工作已经进入创建这个硬币,更多的工作计划。
我希望从这个风险但只有开发者致富后浓缩世界通过提供创新和创造。
包含premine的地址是公开的和运动的资金可以观看。

我的看法:
我觉得一个币种发展是需要开发基金的。我不认为2%和4.5%之间的根本区别。而且预挖地址已经公开，随时可以查看。前期因为营销活动和支持上M网投票已经使用掉了一部分。
我希望开发者也买了或开采大量的SC。

TLDR:
对于开发者细节的批评是有效地,但重要的事情是持续的开发工作和发现问题立即纠正。
一些细节开发者觉得优先级不高，也就是不太重视，但是社区比较重视。(社区参与可以帮助修复细节问题。)
有充足的证据表明dev团队能力,看看钱包,别人现在复制SC的钱包。
白皮书中包含的愿景,可以改变钱包的功能。
免责声明:
我自己也持有一些SC但不够,SC到达10美元是我就可以退休了。
我看好SC,认为它会涨价。

翻译的不错..大家传阅读..MEGAman一看就有问题一直在造谣那有那么好的人.