Quote from: sixteendigits on July 10, 2014, 12:29:07 AM

Quote from: doldgigger on July 09, 2014, 10:31:38 PM

Quote from: NUD on July 03, 2014, 04:04:08 AM

Quote from: doldgigger on July 03, 2014, 03:51:25 AM

Well, considering that you probably also hold some NUD, I understand that you may think that it is best to mute me so no one looking into this thread will become aware of the scams that were ran using NUD. But a good altcoin doesn't need such tactics. We can work together to create an altcoin community which is actually perceived as a benefit by all involved parties, with no exchanges being scammed, no one noticing that his coins are gone, etc.

It is not rocket science to run a coin in a reasonable way. But it requires the dedication to actually do so.

No one is denying the fact that scams were ran on NUD by scrypt miners exploiting a bug in the early release, thus it was decided upon that the "scammers" will be rewarded 10% of their scrypt mined coins for their contirbution to the network for revealing the bug. If you don't think that the decision was just you can freely open your own thread and start a fork, I very much doubt that you'd get a lot of followers that are willing to sabotage the well-being of the network in exchange for their unjustly mined NUD.

The decision was made in such a manner as to upset the least miners, had we not reduced the fraudulently mined coins to 10% people would claim that I abused the bug to mine coins for myself (e.g. a premine).

Well, who saw the code first, and could actually schedule a 7-day scrypt mining operation? It was you. Everybode else had to wait for the release. So, I doubt any smart person would be deceived by the rude wording you use for the scrypt miners whose success was enabled by the software you released. Reducing the premine to 10% does not change this.

But this topic is really boring. What I find more interesting than deciding about how much reduction a premine needs in order to look less suspicious are things like the altcoin exchange scamming scheme seen on this thread. No doubt a smart move in order to secure some tiny profit, but I am somewhat sceptical if it will benefit the altcoin world.

Quote from: NUD on July 03, 2014, 04:04:08 AM

Where there is original innovation there will always be bugs present, if you don't like that you might want to invest into some clonecoin.

Some innovators rather invest in decent skills, which buys them a community which doesn't have to run buggy software.

What? Who could schedule a 7-day scrypt mining operation? Uhhhh.......anyone with a few bucks for an ASIC or a few fractions of a BTC to rent some mining power? You aren't making sense.

Looks like some people were lucky finding it out early. But the only party which could schedule the operation would be the dev and his team, because at the point the coin was released, there was the "bcrypt" fake advertisement.

Quote from: sixteendigits on July 10, 2014, 12:29:07 AM

The scrypt bug was discovered very quickly after the coin was launched, it was no big secret. Can you please point me toward anyone who still says they never got their 10% from after the blockchain reset? How does angering a bunch of miners, cutting the coin count to 10% (which would include the coins that the dev supposedly secretly mined using a bug that wasn't even secret?), and actively discouraging NUD from being trading on an exchange be profitable at all? Either NUD is legit, or the dev is guilty of running the most convoluted scam ever conceived in crypto.

Well, did you follow what happened to cryptcoin? After seeing this, even highly convoluted altcoin scams don't look too far-fetched anymore. These things happen. But it's nothing to whine about. NUD still has some interesting technology included, so we should all work together to make the coin a bit more legit than a "well, we can't prove it through the blockchain because we deleted it, but no one complains about missing coins anymore". If you have seen how aggressive some people on this forum are towards people who want to look a bit deeper into potential fishyness, it is pretty obvious that a "no one complains about missing coins anymore" statement is worth nothing. A small fraction of the community (probably those who made the greatest profit early) probably scared away many interested user through their "shut up if you lost coins" attitude. In my opinion, a lot of users contributed to the coin early on, and even putting off one early contributor is a pity.

Also, I find it boring to discuss about legit or not. Blockchain crypto allows us to create transparency, so every user can see what the coin is about. Think about it: What is more trustworthy towards a new user? A coin where the blockchain clearly shows an scrypt and a bcrypt phase (wouldn't be the first coin which had multiple phases)? Or a coin where the forum advertises an attitude of "we call everyone who asks about the pre-mine a faggot"?

The bottom line being: Even if the 10% decision was a good one (which I doubt, even though it would be profitable for me since I did not engage in the scrypt phase), any decent developer could have incorporated it in the blockchain, creating hard source-code- and blockchain-based evidence, rather than some warm words on a forum.

Quote from: sixteendigits on July 10, 2014, 12:29:07 AM

The irony is everyone was too busy bitching and moaning about all the NUD they lost after the blockchain reset to realize that CPU mining was piss easy. I solo mined more NUD with 3 desktop CPUs and 1 laptop in the week after the reset than I did BEFORE the blockchain reset with scrypt mining.

Indeed

. As said, the actions of the dev led to more NUD for me because I did not mine scrypt. But I'm not an opportunist. I think the merit of cryptocurrencies is that they allow us to create consensus over a community. And some of the early actions were rather bad for having more than some early stakeholders to trust in the coin.