Unless the interest rate is ridiculously high (> 7% annually), whatever coins in circulation would take a over a decade to double again.  Hence, the first 4 months would produce X number of coins, and then it would take at least a decade to make that many more again. 

Now I don't actually know what the planned PoS interest structure is for this coin, but if it's too high, then it promotes only hoarding.  With only one exchange, you really don't want to take away one of the only other means of acquiring the coin. 

Now I'll also agree that the halving rate is really quick on this coin as is, so it isn't like there is a ton of traditional mining left to do, so the argument is kind of pointless to make either way, but the above statements about changing a mined coin to full PoS stand just because the end result is a distribution like I mentioned above where early adopters hold an inordinate amount of power over the price and liquidity of the coin. 

Well, you sound defensive.  If your attacks against my statements are reliant upon debating the loose use of the word "always" then you are stretching.  I meant that since Blackcoin skyrocketed, there have been so many full PoS coins and other coins clamoring to go full PoS, and it's usually led by a minority of the coin community who happen to hold a majority of the current coins in circulation.  Hence, they stand to gain the most from full PoS as they are effectively the gatekeepers to most current and future coins without them having to worry about losing out to increased mining interest.  

PoS is not in its infancy.  In cryto-terms, it's old as could be and originated with Peercoin which almost every PoS coin borrows heavily from.  It will be two years old next month.  Full PoS is relatively new, but so saturated in the marketplace at this point that switching to it does nothing from a demand standpoint.  

There are always a vocal minority of majority bagholders that want full PoS because they believe it increases the value of their bag.  It has nothing to do with anything else besides the mistaken belief that somehow limiting supply increases demand.

It does not.  All it does is drive away miners which are the major source of liquidity in a nascent coin that doesn't have much use in the marketplace. 

I really shouldn't look into this at work, but I love a good puzzle. 

There are a couple of large fallacies with your argument.

1)  No one is dumping UTC from the multipool.  If they are, then they don't know what they are doing because the multipool is dishing out UTC after mining something else, selling it, taking and paying fees along the way, and giving them what ever is left in UTC.  The idea behind dumping coins is to make a profit.  It would be much more profitable to just never buy the UTC and stop right after they sell whatever the multipool is mining.  It makes no sense that they would willing submit themselves to paying the fees to purchase UTC and then immediately turn around and sell it again. 

2)  How about we lower it to .0005 coins per block?  The market will eventually adjust right?  Cause it makes people buy more.....
You can't force demand by limiting supply.  All you are guaranteed to do when you do this is reduce the number of people mining the coin because the market isn't going to care how many coins are being generated a day.  They are going to care about the historic price trend and they are going to need a better reason why coins today are worth more than the 16 million already in circulation. 

The price isn't going to change until people decide they want some of those 16 million. 

What you are really wanting to  do is reduce the sell side pressure as you see it as a problem.  But it's only a problem because you don't like the way the price is moving.  Liquidity is the lifeblood of any currency and if it isn't moving, it's no better than a digital sticker. 

Miners dumping coins on exchanges was never your problem.  That's the only thing this full PoS solution really solves.  

I don't know what "experts" in the crypto field you spoke to, but you only heard what you wanted to or were fed bad advice.  PoS with a 7 day minimum coin age is a disaster waiting to happen as far as the blockchain is concerned.  It will be fine... initially.  There are plenty of people with a whole lot of coins not doing anything with them.

 But at 30 second blocks (I'll review the code to see if your PoS implementation is on the same schedule as PoW), you're going to have 20,160 blocks in each PoS minimum age cycle.  I highly doubt you wrote new code that restricts the total number of coins that can be staked in each block, hence you'd need 20,160 separate instances of stakeable coins every week to keep the transactions times constant.  

If we make the assumption that the average wallet may have quite a few different coin ages in it at any given  time, I still wouldn't guess there would be more than 25 stakeable instances per wallet per period.  You'd need 806 wallets open 24/7 with stakeable coins to hit that number.  That's assuming none of them ever move them.

Which is the other problem with PoS.  The whole rise in price of most PoS coins was due to their limited distribution period where people bought and hoarded them because they felt like they were getting in on a limited time offer.  After the first few dumps that happened after the PoS phase started for coins, the dumps came earlier and earlier.  New PoS coins can't even sustain their pump to the end of their distribution stage anymore before being dumped as people try to get out while the getting is good.

Now you have a full PoS coin that basically does not allow people to get in on the limited distribution stage.  How are you going to market that?  

"Hey, we're full PoS!  The only way you can get it is to buy some from us!"
"Why do I want to buy it?"
"Because you need to get it while the price is still low!"
"Why?"
"Because our multipool is going to be buying it all up!"
"What are they doing with the UTC they buy?"
"...selling it to you, dear investor!"
"Why do I want it again?"
"So you can hold and sell it to other investors."
"This sounds like a pyramid scheme."

The point is that you still haven't created demand and now you've killed the only identity this coin has marketed for the past 5 months.  It's no longer a mineable asic-resistant coin, and there is a good chance transactions speeds are about to suffer.  You can't arb with it, you can't use it anywhere that other coins can't be used, and now you've shunned everyone that hadn't already been a part of the community.  The only way out is to cannibalize those within the community now as you buy and sell to one another.  

The statement's been put out there and I wouldn't take it back at this point, because looking flaky is only going to shake confidence even further.  But I really would have strongly advised against hopping on a bandwagon that has already passed.  

How exactly would pulse work on a coin like logicoin where transaction volume is nearly nil.  If block creation was significantly slowed down during periods of low to no transactions, what incentive would people have to mine on the network?

Is there another part of this strategy that includes ways to increase the transaction volume of this coin?

A decade ago, some kid got famous for selling ad space (by the pixel) on his website with his goal of reaching a million dollars.  don't remember the site.  But once it got news tractions, he was able to reach his goal.  this is a dead ripoff of that.  I'm not hating, just kind of jealous someone did something so derivative, and so simple, yet is still making a shitload off of it.  

If you guys go full POS, it will do nothing for demand.  I don't know why that is so hard to understand.  Why do I want UTC suddenly because you are PoS? Why do I want to buy a coin that changes it's mind as to what it is every other month?  

The problem is this thread is full of bagholders trying anything to artificially boost the value of the coin with no regards as to what the perception of those actions will be.  Go to the parent of this thread and count how many PoS coins are on the front page and ask yourselves how those are doing.  How's mint?  How's Liberty?  How's Minerals, Sat2, Guerilla, Fire, Nxt, etc.  There are probably 50 more of them.  

But I'm sure you're all stuck on Blackcoin's success.  How about Whitecoin?  It's down 90% from PoW phase.  

You're just going to look flaky and desperate going full PoS.  It will be seen as manipulative by those not involved in the coin as it effectively gives bagholders all the leverage.  I seriously doubt it will raise demand, but I can see it completely killing it.  

A few things:

1)  I highly doubt UTC is going full PoS anytime soon.  It was always the plan that it would at some point in time much later down the road after PoW ended, though.  

2)  The 10x gain from PoS being "unmineable" after the initial distribution stage has long since passed.  Most PoS only coins that have a short distribution stage peak about 2 days before PoW distribution ends and then they are dumped hard.  

3)  Switching a coin like this to full PoS would alienate everyone not in the community already.  If I don't have UTC, what is my incentive to buy it from you since there is no other way for me to get it?  What would differentiate you from the 50 other PoS only coins that exist now?  

4)  It's the trollbox.... I don't need to elaborate.  

PaulR1 -- did you get my PM?

Thanks, make sure you update the website link as well. 

Are you going to post the source?  It has not been updated and honestly, the last guys added some code that completely disabled POS (the change wasn't ever activated as the coin age wasn't changed).  I'd like to know if you rolled it back or that at least your developers are competent by seeing what they changed.  Blind wallet downloads are never a good idea these days. 

I'm done trying to help you guys with suggestions as everything you don't like is FUD this, Troll that.  There are much worse things that I could have brought up that I tended to keep in PM's instead of publicly posting it here.  

I mentioned what I did as a gentle reminder that multipools aren't necessarily a good thing for POW coins, and especially not for coins that have such a small mining base as is.  You think 200 miners is awesome, but most of them don't have much hardware behind them.  When your main pool goes down, you have about 2.4 MH on the network.  That's about two 290x mining farms away from being 51% attacked.  And don't tell me they aren't out there.  There are people out there that do exactly that when they see the opportunity.  

You guys are like a cult now.  You don't even realize it.  

You guys do realize that no one is actually mining UTC right now don't you?  Someone could fork it with minimal hardware at this point.  The only thing you have going for you is that there isn't enough interest to do it right now. 

If everyone is on multipool, you're doing yourself a disservice as a POW coin.  Something to think about. 

You've all gone off the deep end.  Take a deep breath, stop typing nonsense, and get back on point.  

I'm not sure most of you even know what you're doing here or why you're defending things.  You're like Brown's fans.  
Not all selling is miners.  Everything is likely not going to be alright if you get the payment processor.  Not having a dev or a clear vision for the coin is going to ultimately end you.

This is not trolling.  This is a reality you all need to deal with.  Give others a compelling reason to buy this coin tomorrow or you're not going to have much of one.  there are 200+ alts at this point.  Stand out and make it obvious and compelling or you might as well all just sell now.  

That is what I said, I'll just copy it below and save myself the trouble of explaining it.  


The wallet passes the Timestamp to the function, subtracts the start time to get the total length of time the coin has been producing blocks, does some funky arbitrary math, then returns the N factor, assuming it's between 4 and 30.  If the value is outside that range ( 4> x >30), then it returns 4 or 30.  That's it.  Every call to get the N-factor in every other part of the wallet uses a call to GetNfactor.  For a short term fix, you just comment out the entire block of code, and write "return 12".  Then all the function calls remain the same and you are just forcing a set N factor until you decide on a proper schedule.  

I wouldn't imagine the mining software would care that it is hardcoded.  I'd need thirtybird to go over that though, as I really don't know a ton about that side of it.  I looked at his YACminer code and there are calls to getNFactor, but I got tired of tracking down where they were going to.  He's much better at this stuff than me anyway so he can probably tell me whether there is something wrong with what I said above as well.  

I'm not sure why the N-factor change has to be so complicated.  I'm getting ready to go home for a long, long weekend but, if I remember correctly, there is just a convoluted function that has a bunch of arbitrary calculations that result in a block heights to change the N-factor at.  The point is, I thought it just returned nFactor and all the other things that used that value derived it from that function.

Why couldn't you just comment that all out and hardcode in the return value to be the N-factor you want it to be, aka 12?  

Obviously, this would be a mandatory wallet update.  No ones wallet would work on the old N-factor so you'd have to set it at a date in the near future.  

I had 1 BTC of DRK because I liked the work they were doing on that coin, and held it for over a month and a half and all it did was go down 10%.  I traded it in to do some daytrading on other coins and literally the day later is started getting pumped to the moon.  It's worth 5x what it was when I dumped it.  Makes me sad. 

Some general suggestions:

1.  If I was an editor that received unsolicited email asking me to write about something, if I take the time to read it at all, it better give me a good reason to write about it.  This does not.  Much like cover letters to resumes, you are wasting your time unless you tailor your message to the exact person that's going to read it. 

If you're sending this to The Economist (or similar magazine, just putting one out everyone would know), you would pitch this as a potential article about the difficulties of developing a legitimate alternate payment ecosystem within an industry dominated by get-rich-quick schemes and  immature, rigged market that makes trading penny stocks look safe.  The crux is you still have to define what really makes UTC standout, what is the compelling story that makes UTC different than other coins in the alt market?  What struggles have you overcome?  What developments set you apart that make you not like the other coins that exist in the rigged market?

If you were sending this to Wired, you would pitch it as a piece about the rise of ASICS and altcoins, and the struggle to keep video card mining as a legitimate means for cryptocurrency to not become the centralized beast it was meant to oppose.  Emphasis on hashing algorithms, ASICS vs GPUs, and, once again, a compelling reason why the story should revolve around  how UTC fits in this picture and why it's different. 

So on and so forth.

Do not send out letters with generic platitudes about great people doing great things and then list none of those things or people.  Do not spam links that require an interested party to try to figure out why they should be interested.  No one of any importance is going to take any of that seriously. 

And most of all -- if you don't have a compelling story yet, do something so that you do have one.  You are not Coke, you can't just spam your name as part of your advertising campaign.  You don't have any brand recognition. 

Notice the links above about DCGirl were all about her and her relationship with crypto / UTC.  Get the interest?  Women and Crypto / Coding are about as rare as Gaming and Women.  It's unique, hence, something worth writing / reading about. 

And that should be your ultimate litmus test for anything you send out -- Would you want to read that email if it showed up in your Inbox?  Would you care about what that person said if you didn't know them or anything about what they were talking about?  Would you click on any of those links?  Would you want to know more about it at all?