Quote from: adud on June 24, 2014, 11:16:24 PM

Quote from: rugrats on June 24, 2014, 05:09:59 AM

Quote from: CryptoHits on June 24, 2014, 03:44:17 AM

So there seems to be hoards of Litecoin threads, Either vehemently for it or against it claiming 'official' death. Most of these threads are self-moderating so as to reinforce the views of the original poster. Which is bullshit nonsense.

So here is an unmoderated thread (by myself at least, Forum mods still apply) where you can freely discuss. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=663590.0

My personal views on Litecoin are that it has very little reason to hold the #2 spot anymore.

The majority of the reasons it ascended to the #2 spot are no longer valid arguments.

Sure it was 'ASIC proof', We all know how that worked out.
Sure it wasnt BitCoin. But there is 100's of 'Not BitCoins' now.

It was innovative until 9000 other people did it and improved or experimented with the formula.

The one thing that is still a valid reason for it to retain #2 is seniority and perhaps derivative works

Another interesting way to look at coins would be to rate them by Algo, of all coins using a specific Algo, which is top for each. Now rate each algo by relevance or importance. And that is your new 'top coins'

I think so too. Litecoin has seniority, but can that alone guarantee its future relevancy?
Perhaps I am wrong, but there are a number of more innovative coins with more energetic user base. I see them closing the gap with Litecoin with each passing day.

One could argue that Bitcoin survives because of seniority, and seniority is the reason for Bitcoin acceptance, so why not? Maybe Litecoin is boring because there is no Silk Road, there is no MtGox (that one was close), almost no lost and stolen coins. Those are likely THE reasons Bitcoin ascended, and are no longer valid arguments, but they played the major parts of making it. So, both Bitcoin and Litecoin are changing fundamentals, is that a bad thing?

All I see is that both BTC and LTC are growing up, older brother is still young, younger brother is even younger, and the other alts are babies. BTC and LTC are innovations that are still not understood and/or used worldwide, and I'm still waiting for the next really useful mainstream innovative coin that survives longer than pump&dump (it will happen one day, of course, I'm not saying everything sucks). And to have a good pump, energetic user base is created on newer coins when needed.

But we are not discussing the merits of Bitcoin now, are we? That will take another thread and a thousand.

Litecoin positioned itself as the 'silver' to Bitcoin's 'gold', and you have to admit that allowed Litecoin to prosper in the slipstream. Just look at the historical correlation between fiat value. It also doesn't hurt that most of Litecoin's whales are also Bitcoin whales.

However, while Bitcoin's public perception has leaped by the order of several magnitudes, has Litecoin done the same? Has Litecoin distinguished and cemented itself as, to borrow your analogy, the younger brother? Or is it merely a displaced and dare I say, undeserved sense of entitlement?

Consider the community. Take a look at, say, Peercoin. Have you visited their forum? For example, look at the stark difference in how the Litecoin and Peercoin communities handled the video making campaign. Consider the funding, fervor and professionalism. What about Reddit? Look at say, Darkcoin. The first page is filled with new threads from the last 24 hours. Litecoin, on the other hand, has threads that dates back a week. You may find this hard to believe, but some of the third-tier altcoins today have communities that is far more vocal and louder than Litecoin. If you don't believe me, take a look at say, Minerals, and you will see what I mean.

Consider development. Bitcoin has a thriving development community that features some of the best and brightest. As a non-programmer, I sometimes spend hours reading through the threads here - it is that interesting. Ditto for Nxt, Darkcoin, etc. What about Litecoin? I was literally shocked reading this Litecoin wiki entry by Warren Togami explaining why Litecoin is rejecting X11: https://litecoin.info/X11 . The level of wrong and opinions-disguised-as-facts here is something one would expect from people like you and me - not the Lead Dev of LTC.

Finally, a great indicator of Litecoin's presence within the general public. Here's some screen caps of Google's related keyword search data for

Bitcoin: http://i.imgur.com/YoC0jvL.png
Litecoin: http://i.imgur.com/KrVax0U.png
Dogecoin: http://i.imgur.com/0m6msJ2.png
Darkcoin: http://i.imgur.com/m3Xnpme.png

Things that you noticed from the above:
Litecoin lags significantly behind Bitcoin - by as much as 30 times less
Dogecoin generates higher related search queries
Darkcoin generates up to a third of Litecoin's search volume, just several months after launching - and rising.

Bear in mind, the search terms used fits the profile of people from outside of crypto, and thus, is a great comparative indicator of the level of brand awareness for the four coins.

Let me be clear that I am not a bagholder of any of the coins mentioned above - almost 95% of my cryptos are in BTC. Let me also be clear that I am not likely to return and respond to this thread. I don't usually spend too much time writing - I prefer to read and/or make money.

However, this needs to be said: Litecoin does not have an automatic claim to be the silver to Bitcoin's gold. It has to work and earn that position. While Charlie Lee is definitely an incredibly brillliant, brilliant man, he is not a messiah capable of orchestrating community-wide PR, development and adoption campaigns. Scrypt has lost its shine, and you cannot just depend on giant miners to secure the network (or the goodwill of Coinotron to not launch a double spending attack). Neither can Litecoin just coast along behind Bitcoin.

The sky is definitely not falling - but it is going to rain, and denying it won't turn the dark clouds away (boy, I am so good at making awful idioms).