Hi !, thanks for answering! just to be clear i never said that Syscoin is a bad quality code neither that it is not original. I said that it is fairly easy to understand ( that is a compliment by the way) but to believe that it would be very difficult to fork is just not true (this is in response to some assertion of a member of your team).
I never said that you were a bad coder, in fact i said you were good (literally i said that ) , but my perception is that your ego is (was ?) bigger. I understand now that you have full time jobs and this is a complex project.
Let's be honest though, should Oracle evaluate the development management of this project you would surely fail and you know it. You also know that the team is not at the level that a corporation require for any minimum source code. All of that would be forgivable if you do it for free, but your team asked 1500 btc which is a lot of money, whether you received the money or if moolah expended all in prostitutes is completely irrelevant for investors.
Sincerely i would never have invested in the project knowing that you guys have full time jobs ( as most of crypto developers ) but at least that explains a lot of things.
I know it is my fault to make suppositions, that is the game and surely that is the reason risk/reward is so high; but the image you sold to investors is that the team is capable of producing corporate quality code and to bring top management skills to the table, you failed to deliver that.
With 1500 btc you asked from investors you could hire 5 full time devs for 2 years. Again, its irrelevant that you didn't receive the money, but investors surely don't have that money in their pockets.
Maybe if you dedicated full time to this project, history would be different.
I never said that you were a bad coder, in fact i said you were good (literally i said that ) , but my perception is that your ego is (was ?) bigger. I understand now that you have full time jobs and this is a complex project.
Let's be honest though, should Oracle evaluate the development management of this project you would surely fail and you know it. You also know that the team is not at the level that a corporation require for any minimum source code. All of that would be forgivable if you do it for free, but your team asked 1500 btc which is a lot of money, whether you received the money or if moolah expended all in prostitutes is completely irrelevant for investors.
Sincerely i would never have invested in the project knowing that you guys have full time jobs ( as most of crypto developers ) but at least that explains a lot of things.
I know it is my fault to make suppositions, that is the game and surely that is the reason risk/reward is so high; but the image you sold to investors is that the team is capable of producing corporate quality code and to bring top management skills to the table, you failed to deliver that.
With 1500 btc you asked from investors you could hire 5 full time devs for 2 years. Again, its irrelevant that you didn't receive the money, but investors surely don't have that money in their pockets.
Maybe if you dedicated full time to this project, history would be different.
Thanks for your reply. I'm going to focus on a few specific points. You call out we asked for 1500btc- this is inaccurate. We positioned 1500btc worth of inventory for sale, we didn't say without it being sold out, we wouldn't launch or anything of that nature- just the opposite actually; If the coins didn't sell they'd just be added on to the mining schedule. We said we would use the funds to grow the coin, and that is still 100% accurate. Additionally through DYOR you should have seen we have full time jobs, almost the entire team doxx'd themselves. You can find most of us on LinkedIn and we did also disclose this in presale threads (we have jobs).
With 1500 btc you asked from investors you could hire 5 full time devs for 2 years. Again, its irrelevant that you didn't receive the money, but investors surely don't have that money in their pockets.
Maybe if you dedicated full time to this project, history would be different.
Maybe if you dedicated full time to this project, history would be different.
You quote that you know we don't have the full fund. A few sentences later you say we should be using the full fund to hire fulltime developers. Then you say the fact we don't have the fund is irrelevant, but just a few words before that you said we should use it to hire developers... I'm just pointing out the contradictions (or lack of clarity) in the statements you're making.
I said that it is fairly easy to understand ( that is a compliment by the way) but to believe that it would be very difficult to fork is just not true (this is in response to some assertion of a member of your team).
You're referring to something I said but representing it inaccurately. I said it would be hard to maintain and enhance. Forking any code (aka: cloning) is dead simple.
care to elaborate what better technology than Qt for C++ and why ?Are you really sure of what you are saying ?
We're moving away from a C++ based UI technology for future wallets. And yes I'm sure. Many other wallets are already doing this with good reason. We're looking at both straight Java and pure web-technologies delivered in a packaged experience. Look at coins like NXT and NHZ.
As Coderboo mentioned earlier, we are working on sourcing additional coders (and other staff) as needed to expedite development but since you are in the industry yourself you know good coders are hard to find and come at a steep price. Nonetheless as stated in several of my replies on the last pages, we're looking for these people.