We're going to keep focusing on what we think is important: Utility, ease-of-use, and mass adoption. That's what we have built and that's what we are continuing to work on.
Thanks for confirming, that was my point: there are many disappointed investors and community members, because they assumed your academic training come with less stubbornness, more flexibility and adaptability, and you are willing to react when your theme is not accepted by the market. Your theme is not good. It failed. The market don't like your theme and direction, that's why your coin is 9.5k as we speak and your volume is 7 BTC in Bittrex. The market has spoken, but you are not listening. I guess that's the arrogance of youth that Barrabas has pointed out. This community including me had been asking for weeks please consider blockchain 2 development, you just simply ignore it. I fully understand the implication of the undertaking such a massive development task - on the other hand as we can see 1-2 developers of other coins can role out blockchain 2 features. Many investors/community members hoped you are capable to pull out such development, it seems you are not, and therefore there are disappointed investors/community members - more importantly, there are no new investors.
To be frank, they aren't the same kind of coin by any stretch of the imagination. VIA/Ether/etc. started after the BTC developers requested 2.0 activities not be used on the chain as it was bloating it. VeriCoin is becoming a currency that is easy to use for everyone with utility. We are working on different types of things than VIA/ETHER/etc.
Technically speaking this is not true. I had a chat about it with some BTC developers on the other day. I heard again what they always say, actually they would be happy to see sensible blockchain 2 features e.g smart contracts on the BTC blockchain. All they did, as you know reduced the OP_RETURN output to 40 bytes to make the whole thing a bit sensible and avoid to implement dropbox type of apps on the blockchain. As I can see you do have OP_RETURN output on your source so nothing stopping you to implement blockchain 2 features. You are just not interested in that, you are working on same lame user name feature (which has nothing to dowith blockchain 2) and you are working on your mass worldwide adoption theme.