Quote from: Minotaur26 on November 11, 2014, 01:42:35 PM

Quote from: Kai Proctor on November 11, 2014, 01:03:08 PM

Quote from: Honest Tim on November 11, 2014, 12:54:19 PM

Quote from: crowning on November 11, 2014, 12:20:47 PM

Quote from: Honest Tim on November 11, 2014, 12:11:55 PM

I simply can't get my head around why Evan worded the "Darksend - Security Bulletin " the way he did.
Why why why??

Because it's honest?

I'm talking about being conservative with the truth, as opposed to the complete opposite.
It could have been spun any number of ways. I would have gone for "exhaustive thoroughness in the interests of security".

He's not sugar coating : PoH, proof of honesty Cheesy

This is Evan's trademark brutal honesty and as an investor is very comforting. I think what happens is just group psychology, everybody understands that the issue presented is relatively minor and fixable but are trying to predict how others are going to react and may sell some coins in the hope of baiting panic sellers, and everybody is thinking the same thing. Although at this point Darkcoin has already developed a reputation for transparency which is very favourable and I wouldn't be surprise if the uptrend continues.

We have to be reasonable and understand that this is an open source project that is constantly being improved upon, that is why we wanted it open source to have more eyes on the code.

This may be counter intuitive to some because most of the time products are developed in a close environment and then release to the public. For example, when Samsung is developing the new Galaxy S6 there are many prototypes, versions and fixes before they launch it and even after, we just dont get to see behind their close doors. In our case we get to watch the whole development process live, is like we are sitting at the lab watching the engineers work. This is great for Darkcoin investors, it does not get more honest than this, but we have to develop a sense of when an issue presented is part of the hardening and natural evolution of the project and when is something that limits the prospects of the coin or changes the fundamentals.

This change in the fee structure does not change the fundamentals at all, we are just looking to prevent spamming and sybil attacks without compromising anonymity. So we all agree there must be fees, we just need a way to charge the fees that doesn't give away too much info about the process and it seems like we already have several options and paying the fee to the miners seems to be the one we are leaning for, which I think is a very friendly alternative. So for newcomers take the opportunity and buy in the dips this project will just continue moving forward and hats off to Evan for always prioritising what is best for Darkcoin above short term price movements, that is a warranty for the future.

This! Great post!