Quote from: BitCoin Operated Boy on October 01, 2014, 04:53:45 PM

Quote from: Xircom on October 01, 2014, 03:10:40 PM

Quote from: BitCoin Operated Boy on October 01, 2014, 12:59:28 PM

Quote from: chicken65 on October 01, 2014, 11:19:01 AM

Shame...

Price was going really well last night until someone(s) laid down six stacks of 5 BTC walls around 15. From that moment the price
stopped rising. Im certain the price would have hit 20. Interesting there hasnt been a price crash due to those walls so if the whale(s)
were looking for cheaper coins their walls arnt working. Maybe they should consider removing those walls.....let the price go up
and they can join in the fun to. Alternatively its the person who owns 40% of this coin playing games..but its really in thei interest
to push the price upward, not downward...

I saw these walls too.

Bittex detrimental bot system-pattern has just repeated itself again with LTCD. It gained popularity and people started buying it but Bittrex bot system didn't allow to pass the barrier of 0.000015 BTC.

Check this up.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=802335.new#new

Anyway, the price will certainly come back, at some point, to what it was 2 weeks ago (0.0015 USD/LTCD)

If it is Bittrex they have serious problems if it turns out to be them and we have to investigate.
I do still think its another coin trying to keep the price down. Why on earth should bittrex keep the price down besides if they have interest in another coin.
It is a very strange behaviour thats for sure, when price goes a little further up than ,15 then it kicks in and start to sell lower and not just a little lower its MUCH lower..
Is this possible to track down in anyway ?

You may be right. It's just my guess. We will see.

Quote from: FamousRocky on October 01, 2014, 04:21:42 PM

Quote from: TrollByFire on October 01, 2014, 04:17:11 PM

Quote from: FamousRocky on October 01, 2014, 04:11:57 PM

anyone else noticed that the client version isn´t 1.2.0? Roll Eyes

Someone asked the same question yesterday. I addressed it. Basically it would have taken me an additional 2 hours to recompile and run my entire test suite, verify, sign, and upload the new wallet just to change the version number in the about page. At which point, I would have needed to reevaluate a target block for the fork, and you have an endless cycle. It's purely cosmetic as getinfo reports the correct version, and this can easily be fixed in a quick update later. This was the least important issue that needed to be fixed, and was more urgent to get the update rolled out so that everyone would have time to update their wallets.

Basically: It wasn't overlooked, but there were more important things to address. Let us deal with the issue at hand first.

okay, thanks.
but what about the block explorer? it shows 37008.
my wallet (1.1.0 pre = 1.2.0) stuck on 36999 Wink

I updated my wallet yesterday and it also now stuck at block 36999 :-)

Just read 2 post back and you have your answer !