Quote from: brg444 on November 05, 2014, 06:56:31 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 06:28:48 PM

so instead of giving me a rational argument about why my above scenario is wrong, you'd rather deflect the issue?

The argument is here :

Therefore you propose that some users will prefer storing their value in a sideshitcoin that is more volatile, less risk-averse, less secure and has no distinct feature.

Can you argue this is not plausible?

but scZC is MM'd and direct mined for security alongside the scBTC. therefore it is more secure than today's altcoins. sure, the exchange price for scZC might be volatile as are altcoins today but b/c it has the advantage of being MM'd and direct mined as a result of scBTC being attracted to this SC for the same perfect anonymity reasons, it should do better than today's altcoins.

Quote

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 06:28:48 PM

any nowhere did i say that miners will not care to mine or MM this scZC. i said the opposite, they would be encouraged to mine or MM it.

Yes you did, right here :

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 06:16:04 PM

and once scZC establishes a value, miners will be encouraged to direct mine or MM.

This suggest before scZC establish considerable value there is no incentive for miners to MM or mine them

Bitcoin started of at $0. "there was no incentive to mine them" yet they were. once they were bought and traded, price started to rise. scZC only has to be mined by its dev to get things going.

Quote

Quote from: cypherdoc on November 05, 2014, 06:28:48 PM

the scBTC have no every reason to store on scZC b/c of the risk free put.

You realise this goes against every one of your arguments. Indeed, the scBTC defeats every reason to put anyone's value anywhere else because of the risk free put. The risk free put doesn't exist on the shitsidecoin

fixed it.