Summary:

-IMZ doesn't like Gekko
-Gekko doesn't like IMZ
-IMZ does not let him play at his place despite presumable big Uno holdings of Gekko
-Gekko gets upset and throws mud all over the place and even tries blackmailing people with his coins

haha, like children. I really don't want to loose much of my personal time on it.  


On another side i see Gekkos' point.
If you think you can keep scammers out by making arbitrary face-check at the door i have to tell you: scammers are very friendly people normally so your facecheck to keep the loud misoginist Gekko out does nothing to protect your trading.
The truth is imo: the not optimal ability of IMZ and some others to deal with this rough and often offensive character of Gekko is leading those to not want to have him trade at the guild. But then, people, are there discriminations in place at the guilt so i have to be extra friendly to gain access? Do i need to kiss someones' ass to can trade there? Or are just people with the wrong views on society, politics, money, women, religion or football excluded or included?
Which one is it? Is the guilt discriminating against people who aren't fully adjusted to society? Or just people with loud voices?

I think you at the guilt need to figure out:
-what sense makes closed (outside of view) trading for an open coin? Does it even make sense? Do the benefits of possible price stability outweigh the possible strange alegations and FUD that comes with "trading where only people of type xy can trade and where nobody is watching" (could watch though as it's probably all open to publicto see without registration)?
-or in case these first questions are too tough one would be left with
a) opening it to simply everyone who is not a proven scammer (building trust by limiting lots of trades to small amounts can protect you a liittle for example, escrow! - facechecks do nothing as scammers are friendly and honest people often are unfriendly)
b) or put down unambigous rules which aren't subject to frequent change somewhere what requirements one would have to fullfill to trade at such special off-exchange.

I think all in all it'll be important to a) keep it all 100% public without registration so everyone can see everything and b) give people who do hold Uno and stick around a way to access trades regardless on the Un-ex thing.

I think having this hang in the air where one person can choose to include one and exclude the next one will in fact cause more trouble than benefit either way. Please make some imporvement in some way there so Gekko can be included in some way and doesn't rely on arbitrary face-check.  (to get this mud slinging outa here)

Regards

edit: how about making "accessibility" a mission for Un-ex? How about you think of way to possibly even trade the coin on the uno website ... for example? How about these things? Just idea. Looking for more inclusion and accessibility should be a goal imo and character of people should not be looked at as long as their reputation in trading and paying up their debts isn't tainted.

Getting the Un-ex fully automated and hosted on uno website could be a great project.  Could be like shapeshift just with many people trading instead of just 2 parties?

Some improvement to get Gekko happy would be neat. But whatever you do: don't mudsling the whole thread, guys. Great, thanks!

If IMZ doesn't want to handle it because it could be emotionally charged right now someone else needs to improve on some proper rules please. This isn't a communist banana-island where people would 'make rules as they go along' because that'll not be working to the communities benefit in the long run.
Get the emotion-factor out, put some 'trustless' in, remove arbitrary gut-decisions and get some numbers in and clear rules or no rules at all and just 'open for all' and that's it. But arbitrary face-check at the door isn't a thing that i see having big support. At least i don't like it at all. Keep that discrimination out. Cheers.

Maybe he's difficult to deal with but Gekko is holding coins and has a clean track record in handling money to my knowledge so far so at least grant some kind of access to trade. Use escrow if you aren't trusting. Would be really great if we get some positive developement going there. Thanks.
If you can include the 'honest but loud troublemaker' you are a lot more ready for mainstream adoption

disclaimer: nobody take anything personal, thanks

And i think we almost reached the 7 day limit today. Keep trex alife.

@BN
I think this notice kicks in automatically end of the month and is somehow only looking at the last few days of trading. Since trex let's you buy and sell to yourself you don't even need second account. So this is merely them asking to pay the minimal fee to keep the market listed.
Last time we saw this notice we had like 50btc+ volume the next week on that market.
It comes in waves and trex obviously doesn't look at coin specifics. They just have this one-size-fits-all automatic notice. I guess it's the least effort for them to have it automated. Nothing to worry about. Just a friendly reminder to keep trading alife

translates to: "Give us at least 0.0035 BTC in fees for the last 7 days or we shut your ass down" ... understandable ... how about trading some coins then? 

Been reading on twitter the idea of bitcoin denominated creditcards or giftcards.

That is a thing that can 'rival visa' and is easy possible with defensible small blocks.
The issuer of such cards handles most transactions off chain.
So bitcoin can 'rival visa' already in its current state.

The GavinHearncoin looks more ridiculus by the day.

What is this shit? Are we getting the full Bryce Weiner discount now?
Some buysupport/pressure would be good, guys.

Great work pnoch!

But it is Gavincoin, isn't it? "XT" is what they would love to call it cuz that sounds to fresh and modern but really it's Geavin/Hearncoin and got nothing to do with the consensus based 'Bitcoin core' we are all using right now.
Gavincoin is an alt and everyone would be better off if these clowns would release it as an seperate coin instead of vandalizing bitcoin network.

He never will come around to reply to anything anymore. He drowns in a shitstorm currently. All the shitstorm happening @gavinandresen

I found this 3 minute video helpful to get more clarity.

Recommended:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZp7UGgBR0I

About Gavincoin vs offchain txs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZp7UGgBR0I

Found this online:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZp7UGgBR0I

Makes sense to me. Thought i drop it here.

Well and then people will pretend to update and switch back to core later. You'll be looking how many guns come out the woodwork after the fork to run core... prepare your anus.

Core won't die and two chains are inevitable. Gavincoin doesn't stand a chance longterm with or without "supermajority".  

Supermajority does mean nothing. The waters are poisoned by Gavin and his mob. Nothing will grow from it.

I get too much contradicting info from all angles. I am selling guys, you can all suck a monkeydick.

It is calculated this way:
Daily inflation costs (for bitcoin example 3600 coins times price 230$ = 828k$ global network costs).
This  number is then devided by the total number of transactions that occured in the same 24h.

The number you get out is the overall costs per every individual tx on that day (inflation costs spread out over all txs).

As the total number of transactions is included in the formula the size of the ecosystem is taken into account imo.

I do think you can compare coins directly this way as long as we're talking about similar secure networks. But can also imagine other people would think different.

https://bitinfocharts.com
gives you for a lot of alts the needed info to quickly do that calculation.

For Bitcoin you can get the info ready available here: https://blockchain.info/en/charts/cost-per-transaction

The metric is volatile of course as it depends on price, halvings aswell as on amount of txs that occure. So today a btc tx is only around 7$ while it was 8$ yesterday.

If you look at Uno there aren't a whole lot of txs happening yet (it's also not a tipping coin for micro txs) but as the inflation costs are extremely low the relatively small amount of txs doesn't matter a lot. If txs were to go up from increased userbase it would be really cheap txs and extremely hard to compete with for most other coins.

If altcoin txs were to be demanded more in the future Uno would be first consumers choice (besides maybe doge if it doesn't loose its luster) to even more efficiently and almost as secure transact with crypto while using not Bitcoin. At least that's how i would interpret the numbers. Btc and Ltc txs are really expensive at this point in time imo.

Bitcoin is more and more vulnerable the less nodes it has.
The less nodes it has the more likely a ddos becomes which could have fatal consequences.
This kind of attack where an only medium size enitity (like mastercard or visa for example) could ddos 90% or more of the nodes on the network is highly overlooked and underestimated. That's also a reason a blocksize increase which would further reduce nodes is very unwise.

Imagine Bitcoin with less than 1000 nodes ... it wouldn't be secure at all anymore.

If someone really would manage to ddos almost all nodes on the network i could imagine multiple forks to occure.

Correct me if i'm wrong.

Bitcoin is more and more vulnerable the less nodes it has.
The less nodes it has the more likely a ddos becomes which could have fatal consequences.
This kind of attack where an only medium size enitity (like mastercard or visa for example) could ddos 90% or more of the nodes on the network is highly overlooked and underestimated. That's also a reason a blocksize increase which would further reduce nodes is very unwise.

Higher cap = better dev support, better hash, better pool support  

We're at a point where higher price means also higher value (at least for a notch).

----

Been calculating costs per txs (last 24h to 48h):

Cost for a Bitcoin tx: approx 8$ (and that's a low for btc)
Cost for a LTC tx approx: 13,20$
Cost for a VTC tx: approx 12,26$ (at yesterdays' cap)
Cost for a DASH tx approx: 8,37$
Costs for a PPC tx approx: 1,82$
Costs for a FTC tx approx: 1,53$
Cost for a UNO tx aprox: 0,40$

It's calculated: "costs daily inflation devided by number of tx occured".
The more txs occure the lower the price for a individual tx. Inflation and price are the other factors in that metric. So costs per tx actually is a real good metric to show use vs inflation vs marketcap. I think it's a helpful metric to decide if i coin is over or undervalued.
 
Uno has a lot room for txs growth so in the future the cost per tx in Uno will likely be minimal compared to other coins even on higher cap. So it's highly competitive in that very important area and will be a very interesting coin in case btc blocksize increase goes wrong or doesn't happen at all (odds are 90% of these two possibilities imo).

Really a smart coin, that Unobtanium.

When looking at above tx costs it appears that Uno isn't even overly speculated on as txs are in a very sane range. Tx costs will drop in half with the next halving in case use stays the same. If actual use goes up in the future tx costs will be reduced further.

Thought i'd share some numbers and theory with you.  

Getting users up means getting the theoretical tx costs down for the individual tx.

Cryptopia, great!

I read on the website captchadd is our new dev. I didn't even realize. Great news. Welcome on board captchadd! 

I think getting everything from the last update right first and meanwhile letting the market now undisturbed do its thing for the next couple of months is very good so we can have pricediscovery for the MM update and current markets are just fine for it.

Then 2016 discussion about sidechains ideally implemented by Maxwell himself after solid testing on an outside coin should be a really good plan and will be very positive for Uno imo in case SC prove to be useful and safe.

Bringing it right now before pricediscovery for latest update and before it's even 100% will potentially cause more trouble than benefits, i think. Just leave the market to itself now without any upcoming stress-events so we can have the needed pricediscovery to get hashrate and poolsupport up before next halving occures. Essential stuff first, one step at a time so everyone can be happy.  



-----


Last chance for Uno below 3$ btw. Grab 'em while you can  

The times of miners making an impact on the market are long gone in Uno. It's an investors wet dream the way it is (if the neophiles don't screw it up) and hugely under value.
Change isn't important for it now, it's very good the way it is and we can still improve a lot on pools, hashrate and so on (price plays an important role there). What we need is investors confidence for good demand/supply ratio.
MM update was shortterm negative for the price because delivery was suboptimal. Lots of coins sold on the screwfork. So the last thing we need are more screwforks.
Sellprusse has just gone away and buyers slowly taking over so i'd really recommend to be patient instead of starting more fork-bullshit or even big talks about it. Promises about increased demand from more screwforks aren't believed by anyone. We don't need it now.

Liquidity is important so in case someone wants to sell coins the price shouldn't move down a lot. Not daytrading neccessarily. I'm more value and swingtrader.

The thread is monitored by many people of course and maybe you noticed increased sellorders popping up today? Not a lot but still. The market always tells you a story and today it said "what are these fools starting to discuss such a shit now we just wanted to move up or don't we? Can we have 1 week without forks?"

A scheduled hardfork and a strong bullmarket are mutually exclusive so i don't see why we should discuss a hardfork when the last one is not 100% right yet (still problems with linux, wallet not nice and so on) and it's not even priced in yet. Strategically a very, very bad move to bring up SC right now or even try to press the issue.

Let's care about the wallet, the linux-thing, more pools and good marketing now. SC won't do any good currently imo. Try increasing Bitcoin blocksize first if you're not burned out yet.  

SC might be a great move on higher cap though but certainly not within the next few months. So let's really put the discussion on the bucket list for later on. Thanks.


@edgar yeah, sorry. I'm just sick of forks right now and also of discussions. The coin is brilliant now and SC is really nothing of urgency. Just making a point before the same shit like with the blocksize debate in btc starts over here. Let's just peacfully improve on current grounds. Another fork is a bad idea right now. Totally.

I'm off now too.