Quote from: oblox on November 20, 2014, 10:26:49 PM

Quote from: jwinterm on November 20, 2014, 10:11:44 PM

Quote from: oblox on November 20, 2014, 04:20:37 PM

Quote from: jwinterm on November 20, 2014, 04:13:03 PM

Quote from: oblox on November 20, 2014, 03:32:36 PM

You don't have to be an expert on economics to understand what inflation is. Simply put, too many coins are being mined everyday with not enough buy support to sustain the existing new supply among the current supply. Until you have buyers (demand) for those new coins, price has no where to go but down. To ignore inflation or this very fact means you have been totally oblivious to the constant downward price action in your coin. But... if you are fine with that, continue disregarding inflation.

bitcoin, litecoin, and vertcoin are designed to have high inflation to allow early entrants in the first several years to get in at low cost, so the coin can hopefully be more widespread and effective as a currency. darkcoin (the coin you're primarily a proponent of based on your comment history) had a huge instamine, and then hard forked to change emission, so that almost 35% of the current coin supply (and almost 10% of the total coin supply) was mined in the first eight hours of the coin's life, then rewards were drastically reduced by hardfork. To be fair, vertcoin had it's own issues with instamine, likely due to poor difficulty retargeting when the hashrate was rapidly rising after the coin's release, resulting in 600k vtc being created in ~30 hours, but this is only about 5% of the current coin supply, and less than 1% of the total coin supply. vertcoin, however, didn't hardfork to reward the first day's miners (i.e., the dev(s)) with almost 35% of the current coin supply, like darkcoin did, giving themself/themselves an effective 10% premine.

I didn't come in talking about DRK, I am simply stating a fact that until demand can match or exceed supply, downward pricing action will prevail. Since you brought up DRK, I don't think anyone in the DRK camp is happy about the issues with the instamine but it has been beaten to death that those coins have long since been churned over 2 months of stagnant price action. If that really is your base case argument, it's a bit flawed. Further, the distribution that happened allowed for the expansive network of masternodes already available. With the continued coin supply tied directly to difficulty with a floor and yearly reduction, inflation is minimal at best.

But good luck on Vertcoin. I never came in here talking trash about it, just simply pointed out the fact that an algo change doesn't mean the price is going to change to the upside until demand matches or exceeds new supply. Basic mathematics coupled with basic economics is resulting in the situation VTC is currently in.

What part of "it's a feature not a bug" do you not understand? Tongue

Also, didn't mean to jump on you about darkcoin, I just remembered seeing you in some monero thread(s) recently "not talking trash", so I thought I'd use darkcoin as a contrasting example to vert.

I'll simplify it for you: An algo change as a FEATURE (remaining ASIC resistant) isn't enough on its own to justify any price increases without further demand. Period.

As for the Monero thread, if false shit is going to be spread, it's going to be commented on. But keep going, we can dance circles if you want.

Yes changing the algo doesn't make you coin better. Look at Feathercoin. Everyone was hoping that changing the algo will affect the price. And the result ? A picture worths more than 10k words:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/feathercoin/#charts