"no development, old codebase and slow wallet" 

I'm actually still around (creator of clam here) and recently posted a updated client to github..  much improved. Put clam into a much newer codebase then the peercoin code it originated from.

Its still in beta, and ive been waiting to hear more feedback before pushing it onto master.. but if you check the releases on github.com/nochowderforyou/clams you'll see a new beta release for 2.1.0

all 3 of those points are kinda take care of there!

Updated clam bootstrap.dat

It goes up to block 2097429 which was staked on Fri June 29 2018

https://www.dropbox.com/s/smzhau2dqv2tcls/bootstrap.dat?dl=0

i good sir would like to change  1A9Z7vm87z2AC1LHhrCj8WpCGY8s2BP5EJ   to  142KCa7zn9e1j6qZtK2oDQtcHYwikyvTSH

<3 much love

5a, all the way to my btc addy! BAM    (positive thinking will effect positive outcomes, its totally a thing)

I'd just like to take a moment and thank Kefkius who's development with CLAM has been invaluable. We haven't said so yet officially, but we consider him part of the team



Your first part is correct,  it is a metric that can be used to assess the current "will" of the network. Its up to the petition-maker to gain support for their idea.. but not necessarily required for them to have code. By having the vote you will already know if people are willing to run the new version or not..  no convincing should really be required assuming the vote reaches majority.

I personally suggest a formal place to create a detailed plan of implementation once a vote has been won,  think CIP's (clam improvement protocol) which could be hosted on the nochowerderforyou git repo.
 

If you could pick maybe 2 address's you dug from the same block (any block) as sign messages for them that would be perfect.

Just want to say, if its really true thank you for coming forward!!

Can you sign a message from an address that you dug from?

Respectfully it is not your code to open source. I do have our communications specifying such.

If you want to be pety, so be it. I open souce MY code to the community.

All coins are experimental to one degree or another. All of crypto currency in fact is a giant experiment and the outcome still hasn't been decided from what I can tell.

Bitcoin, the least experimental of any coin at this point still has major debates about changing things that would effect the protocol and potentially the users of the network in unforeseen ways. If that doesn't scream experimental I don't know what does.

We all signed up to be part of the experiment when we became interested in crypto currency. Thats my opinion at least.

Agreed. This is the most logical way forward

In this case it would be greatly helpful if you were a coder. Or even if you understood how PoS works, also helpful. Maybe you should try to understand the issue before you make suggestions like "its only code".
It was an unforeseen side effect of PoS. I could explain it to you in detail but it seems you really don't care for the logic anyways, you've made your conclusions.

Were not all perfect here at CLAM.  Mistakes happen.. we fix them, we try to learn from them..  and move on.

Maybe it is possible to have a provable fair onchain lottery with the bitcoin scripting system. I, nor any one else looking at the problem was able to figure out how.

We also had the issue of needing to move quick. Once a flaw in something like this is found you can't wait around while you figure out a solution to a problem that arguable isn't even solvable within the context of the bitcoin script system.

It was being abused. The only logical recourse was to remove it.

There was no fixing, the lottery was inherently broken and unfixable. 

Suggesting the reward was 1000 is misinformed. It was a max of 1000, and a min of .1, and the overwheming majority of blocks were .1 reward.  Doog posted the chart where inflation increased after the lottery was stopped, you can look back to the last page or two to see it.

I'm a little confused how we progressed to Doogcoin. If theres overwhelming support for whatever changes dooglus would plan on making to doogcoin why exactly are we not implementing them in clams?

I would much prefer to see a unified path then a split. I don't think it will serve anyone positively in the long run.  


 

The server provider had maint I was unaware of and rebooted the server unexpectedly.  Its back up now!

I had a similar reaction. It doesn't really change much just provides a digging limit. It does provide a more solid expectation on the rate of dig's but ultimately like you say, it seems the same end result.  

The way I see it is the current digger is already part of the network. Any plan that trys to stop or limit the current digger is going to fail imo. So it seems to me that any changes we might make are really meant to effect future digging. I don't think spreading out the length of time to dig large amounts has the net effect we would be looking for.

CC's first purposal is very interesting. One thing it doesn't seem to help is the supply inflation from digging. I'm not sure if thats a good thing or a bad thing. It would no longer be in the hands of someone who plans to dump them all but the supply still inflates at an unpredictable rate with potentially large jumps in total supply. We could choose to burn all or some of the fee's associated with dug outputs keeping the supply from inflating from the older dig outputs but Im not sure the implications of that to the model.

Mind you any change short of removing digging alltogether has that unpredictability inherent. Halfing the dig rewards on a set schedule and burning the excess would provide more predictability then currently which gets even better over time while still keeping around the digging aspect of clams.

I'm still not sure of the best way forward. In my mind this diggers 500k (or whatever he currently has left, 350kish) are going to be continued to be dumped until hes done. Im not sure theres anything to stop that. I also tend to believe the market will bare it and eventually recover. I'm not sure of time frames or bottoms but I don't see this one digger being enough to end clams. I know for sure I'm not prepared to let it die or give up and I know I'm not alone.

My real concern is directed to the next digger, and the one after them.

Interestingly (at least to me) there is no reason I can see the dig reward only has to go down in value. You could base the total possible current dig amount on a percentage of the total supply within a given window (like difficulty adjustment) making digs more valuable as the supply increased but still giving a much more predictable inflation rate.

Thats a really rough idea and I'm sure is full of holes.


Your right, it is an invitation.. and I don't think anyone is really on board with revoking any invitations. However, leaving the invitations open ended has created uncertainty and potentially needs to be addressed. I believe a balance needs to be found between investors / stakers and diggers. The fact that the amount available to be dug is 14x the amount that is currently active after almost a year and a half of clams is in my mind a problem.

I do absolutely agree. Any change needs to be considered carefully and ample time needs to be given.  

According to https://multibit.org/en/help/v0.5/help_importingPrivateKeys.html


The replay date being a date you give it. I believe it would update the bloom filters and replay the blockchain from the date you gave it grabbing associated transactions.

As far as I'm aware all dice site admins have this ability.  They know the server seed which is created by them and have them stored somewhere. Beacuse of the nonce method; unless the user is changing their client seed each roll the admins will be able to predetermine future rolls.

It would be a little unnerving to think they have this information readily available to them. Even without any intentions of cheating their users its quite possible they could leak information about future rolls and inadvertently cause issues.

I know dooglus had been known to look ahead from time to time but stopped when he accidentally gave up information to a better.

The name CLAM was my brain child I suppose and took some convincing     Other options were scrip or buckazoids (I was REALLY pushing that one) and some other I foret. 

Clam's (the real life object) have been used as a currency in the past.. Im also a fan of the flintstones. It was also something that was said around where I live.  "You owe me 5 clams!"  was used as a way to say you owe me 5 bucks / dollars etc.  Another slang for money.

I was saying that the only way we can know the person actually has 3% of the clams is for him to claim them, aka move them. Currently its implied he has 3% of all clams by the way he's been claiming but he has yet to actually move the entire 3% it seems likely he has.

Chilly is correct also though. I am including myself as a current clam investor

I don't think the digging should be changed.

Me and creative discussed this with each other before we launched CLAM and made the conscious decision to not end the digging. We wanted to include as many people as possible and we wanted them to always be able to redeem their CLAM.

I think its frustrating for current clam investors to see someone with potentially so many CLAMs (including myself) but ultimately I feel these issues will work themselfs out over time as the available distribution amount increases.

As CLAM's inflates the potential effect further large digs could have will diminish even without doing anything other then waiting.

So while in the short term its annoying to deal with the uncertainty.. getting more dug clams on the market will ultimately improve the situation in the future without making any changes to consensus.

This is of course all just my opinion