Bitcoin Forum

Well i don't like 100% pre-mine coins .Tell me your opinion!!

There good if by good you meant to make the devs rich!


I only get into coins with ZERO (0) NO PREMINE!

It's only a good idea to invest in these if you are a stupid person

So far, one person voted yes and it wasn't me.
A large pre-mine is probably the sign of a scam.
Even a "fair" distribution probably uses sock puppets to give the dev extra.

yep..it will be good as long as the distribution is fair and transparent and so far only 2 of them are qualify with these 2 factors:
1.Comm
2.C2

Doomed to collapse in on themselves eventually.

100% premine is evil!

if there is a transparent distribution why not?

if they require ipo or other garbage shit like that then hell no...

what would you do.use this coin？pos

  must distribute 99

in ripple's case:  in my eyes, xrp's were not meant to be bought and held like some financial instruments like stocks and bonds or even btc. they were meant to be a bridge currency to make transactions easier. now, how can xrp fulfill its purpose if it is being hoarded?

ripple is not about xrp speculation. it is about ripple the network itself. here's one prime example of a use in ripple on a community, non-professional level:  https://xrptalk.org/topic/1865-cultivating-a-web-of-trust-for-trading-hour-ious/

but the reality of it is there will always be speculators despite of what i said above. stupid or not will depend if they make a killing or not.

As some of you guys said, if the distribution is widespread, fair and transparent then it's OK. Certainly the devs can give away coins to themselves by using sockpuppet accounts but i think that not worse than the other forms of premine or even instamining.

these two are Ponzi scheme for me

(When ppl will learn what "Ponzi scheme" means? FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme))

It makes all of crypto look bad when you premine 100% coins out of thin air and then put them on an exchange so they can be exchanged for real money. If you allow one of these, then you have to allow them all and then you got everybody creating coins out of thin air and the markets will implode and we will all be the the laughing stock of the real world.

A coin that had an enormous premine before launch can still function as a coin if the developers hold onto their premined coins instead of selling them. Satoshi currently has about a million bitcoins but he hasn't touched any of them and so the price of BTC isn't falling.

Premine can work as long as the public has confidence in the distribution.
NEM for instance has 3000 stakeholders.  Taint analysis was used to remove hundreds of sockpuppets and the large scale diminishes any return from sockpuppets.

In contrast - you can have something like NxT (100% premine) which only had 73 stakeholders, of which 20 owned the majority, bought all the NxT for 21 BTC.  Probably most of these 20 big stakeholders were sockpuppets since there was no taint analysis used and it was such an obscure IPO that it was likely the same people signing up multiple stakes.

Satoshi mined close to a million bitcoins in early days. Today that early mining is known as Instamine

So Bitcoin=Instamined

100% premined POS coin givenaway to people is the way to go. No precious electricity wasted for mining coins and no carbon footprint, and it is actually the most fair way to distribute coins. It also gives interest on total coins you hold.

Don't believe anyone who denies this

Coin2 did just the same - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=483847.0

Are you stupid...so the first 1000 or so to get in should control the entire currency? That's fair? You don't believe any counter-arguments, let me guess, because you're a holder in Coin2 and you got in before every one else, also because you're greedy as fuck and only care about making profit off of these 100% pre-mine coins?

Ehh, no, thanks, bye. Satoshi helped the network and this was over a long period of time, not a few days. That's like saying if I release x coin and mine it when it launches for a month straight, OMG INSTAMINE!! Also as far as we are aware, Satoshi has not even profited off of this so called "insta-mine". You are really quick to jump to the conclusion of "omg satoshi mined early on Bitcoin=Instamined".

poll should contain more options! :)

Good or bad? What's in the middle? My answer :)

Do you even know how much of bitcoin the top 100 wallets are holding? Probably not, but you will know once a single wallet will try to liquidate and crash the whole market

So people bought a lot, yep. Bill Gates might hold a lot of a certain commodity or currency, you don't see them crashing. People aren't as stupid as you think. Similarly, do you know how much of Coin2 the first 1000 wallets held? 97.5%...

That I find hard to believe, communitycoin tried to distribute to just 1000 geniune and found that hard to do and reduced it the 500 and checks showed that only like 300 odd where proper users etc so I fond 3000 individuals in these parts hard to believe.

Yes in the stocks a few people owning most of a stock is viewed in a very positive light, its the sheep that normally panic not the big holders.

NxT had 20,000+ addresses when NEM was announced  NEM was new code based on a proven (but distribution flawed) concept.  Probably a good half or more of thread 1 for NEM were NxT holders like me?

Communitycoin on the other hand has no prior base to attract, has an unappealing unprofessional name and a complicated IPO for what could be worthless coins.  

Sockpuppets are more common for obscure coins.

Yes but those complications in communitycoin prevented cheating which is why such a limited number qualified, seems if you prevent multi nicks few can get, therefore multi nicks in other coins seem likely to be extremely common and outweigh genuine individual holders.

Communitycoin seems to be the fairest distribution so far, and will prove to be far from 'worthless' as you put it. As per OP 100% premine is fine as long as there's an honest and fair distribution.

it can be the best way if you have honest devs
comm looks like a very good example so far.

even for nxt, the initial distribution wasn't so good, but the development is amazing and has huge potential for everything we wanted.

in the end if it can take off and take over the current system, then i don't mind if a few early adopters got rich.
i really want to see our world evolving with technology, it is obvious that our current system will not sustain for ever, think outside of greed.
that's why i put so much in nxt even if it didn't have the best first impression.

a real but utopia way of distribution would be to create 1 stake for every human on earth, and "somehow" by some mysterious
method manage to give 1 coin to each one.

the coins that are not claimed stay in frozen state until they are claimed.

so everyone starts at the same amount...

as i said, kinda utopia

And you prove this honest and fair distribution how, exactly?

Then you're well-prepared for the coming trollstorm. ;D

Well there are already 6+ 100%  pre-mine shit coins.STOP supporting them.There's no way any coin has been distributed fairly!!  How would you know if dev's have their alt accounts and sent them the coins which they'll dump it later?

The fairest distribution method for PoS coins is selling the currency.  If you give the coins away for free it is impossible to eliminate multiple stakes.

The only reason people don't like this distribution model is because they aren't getting something for free.

*

Haha,maybe,but POS is the answer. :D

those 200m are now blocked, you can sleep quietly