Quote from: othe on November 08, 2014, 07:06:04 PM

Quote from: BanditryAndLoot on November 08, 2014, 06:54:06 PM

Quote from: jwinterm on November 08, 2014, 06:34:42 PM

If the emission is really such a terrible problem, then why isn't boolberry or another cryptonote with slower emission taking more of the total cryptonote market cap? Are you suggesting extending the emission by more than a factor of two (I believe boolberry is emitted twice as slowly as monero)?

While I admire the efforts of every other CN coin quite a bit, they've really been mostly socially eclipsed by this one since the first day. One, maybe two, of them slipped out for a little while, and have recently returned to being little more than a whisper. Saying this now doesn't exclude from these facts changing in the future, only that right this day, we can't compare social issues of a coin with a community to social issues of a coin with a negligible community.

My point here is that the 'social contract' of these other coins can't really be used as a comparison for the other ones right now, because there's not many people around to hold them to it - the communities are too small, and attention has been mostly from a pump group that's recently departed for the time being.

This is through and through a uniquely Monero issue at this point in time.

Quote

The problem isn't miners abandoning. Botnets mine a good proportion and sell their coins accordingly, contributing to the price decline. By launch a new coin, I mean something similar to what canth proposed and what I've seen other altcoins do. Create a new blockchain and have user's "transfer" their coins on the original blockchain to the new one based on the # of coins they hold in their wallet. So like starting a new beginning with a new, much better emission and keeping everything else that everyone loves(the logo, name, website, the ideals) and throwing away the thing that hurts the coin the most(the emission)

The biggest problem I see here is that requires developers to both back and do, as people aren't going to burn money without developer support of the new fork. I don't think any of our developers want to split from each other at this time, nor do I think they should .. but the one's we have now are just as undecided as we are on the subject .. so there's no reason or incentive for them to split up at all. I don't see this situation as possible, unless you've got developers?

Ok once again i explain it like if you guys are 5 years old:
What new FORK!?!?! It takes a few fucking lines of code to change the emission at block XYZ!

We are all open to change if the community reaches a consensus, but it hasn´t so far, so don´t even think of dropping the core team into this mess as it has nothing to do with us being in the way.
The reason why no consensus is reached is prolly because no one has found a good solution so far? An emission he can explain to every monero commuinity member and where the majority agrees that its better for us?
The problem is not on the Monero core team side nor is it on coding that, its solely a problem that till today no consensus has been reached and everyone who proposes something can´t really back it up.

Did some of you guys even talk to miners or poolops about this btw? I guess not even that happened, but flip it like you want they are an important part of the XMR ecosystem.

Quote

if you actually read my post upthread linking to pdf explaining that deflationary nature of a currency that is vulnerable to 51% attack will get attacked once the hashrate drops due to low fees and not enough adoption. this is exactly where monero is headed. i think it is better to be safe now than sorry later when the chain gets attacked.

Do you even know the Emission?? I guess not, before fees kick in it will take over 10 years with the current emission, if we arent successful till then i don´t know but i think we have other major problems then.

That PDF is from nicolas courtois who also released a lot of other rubbish whitepapers on bitcoin; why should i take him serious?

Once again: Don´t point out the problem; present a solution, make a better Emission curve and back it up why its better, present the advantages and disadvantages etc. Thats simply what i expect from a discussion. Just changing the Emission to be only half as fast or whatever can´t be the holy grail.

I love reading your posts. This Straight talk is refreshing.