That's some very nice technical analysis that I agree with, and I love how it's happening with numerous major size bids steadily moving up with price. That's very healthy, especially when volume is expanding at a reasonably stable, not at all exuberant, way. When watching the tape you get the sense, or I am anyway, that this thing could explode way higher at any time, but probably not until after at lease several more days of steady "drift" higher.

I really like what I'm seeing in the DGB market, and even more so considering that BTC has itself gained more than 20% in the last 10 days or so as well!

My experience is that once you've gone beyond 10,000 confirmations, it takes a terribly long time to stake, and the stake you wind up with is less than what you'd get staking the same amount with only 1500 confirmations. It could also take you days to stake, whereas the same amount with only 1500 confirmations will stake in less than a couple of hours, and it'll stake more too boot!

The coin is designed to work like that in order to motivate a more active wallet, thus promoting a more constant widespread use, and, ultimately a much more secure network, and those who don't play an active part in maintaining a vibrant widely distributed network are penalized. So is the person who's away on work or holidays (unless you leave your wallet open constantly, and the rewards are quite decent doing exactly that so it is a very viable option if you don't mind leaving your computer on when you're away for extended periods of time).

In summary, If you've got amounts with more than 10,000 confirmations, be done with it, send them to yourself, and start from zero - the damage is already done and you'll start making more NOBL at a faster rate and much more quickly if you simple destroy the excessive coin age.

Have you ruled out the possibility that it's a latency issue?

Unfortunately, that's not true.

You can start by comparing the DGB Rich List with MYR's, and then post back which you think is more evenly distributed.

http://digistats.info/#/richlist

http://birdonwheels5.no-ip.org/richlist/



Making unsubstantiated statements is like grasping at straw men, and those who do that only hurt themselves.


BTW, the blockchain actually proves EVERYTHING!

But you're right about us not being able to know how much any one person has, just like you'll never know how much money I've got in all my pockets . . . and bank accounts . . . and under the mattress . . .  

But arguing that a coin is poorly distributed by saying you think all the addresses are held by the same person is laughable (not that you're saying that - that's just an extreme example of what is being implied here in this thread), and, as I've just said, if we can't stick with the facts to argue our ideas, regardless of how "limited" they might be, we've just acting like straw men.

A nice little dump on Bittrex last night.

Thanks, whoever you are.  Your DMD are safe now.

Actually, you're right.

And I hope that more people give you +1 on that post, because, as you correctly point out, there is a huge difference, like night and day, between "distribution" on Bittrex and what the real blockchain rich list looks like.

Just a small little detail there Bitcoininspace. ;-)

Why can't I find that on www.gulden.com ?

(I know it's the same website, but why isn't there a link on the main page? ... or why can't I find it?)

"We've added a balance distribution chart that shows how large the top 50 wallets are."

      - That's from Bittrex's new features announcement: https://bittrex.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/204790560-New-Features-on-Bittrex

I think those are real, individual, DGB addresses, not exactly wallets in the truest of senses since wallets can have more than one address, but real blockchain addresses nonetheless. I don't think the same user can have more than one active address per coin - correct me if I'm wrong.

I've repoted you to the moderator asking them to please monitor for and delete scammer posts.

@everyone, it's that easy to help keep things legit around here, and the more the reports, the better.

I've been so busy with my "real" life that I haven't had much time to even read the forum, much less post, but last week I managed to get caught up with the DGB thread, and this weekend, well, at least I've made it this far and I'm finally replying here.  

I'm very happy to see that you liked the report and its commentary on DMD. It's always a pleasure to be able to make favorable comments that are deserving, and in this case, you guys most certainly deserve it! You've done, and continue to do, a wonderful job that I'm sure that no-one doubts you will continue doing in the future, and that - and this I'm just as sure about as well - we'll all keep telling the rest of the world about, each in our own way, contributing our own individual "grains of salt" as best we can, and little by little, we'll take the best of the best mainstream. I'm just happy to play a part, and thanks goes to you guys (and the community) for making it a reality to begin with!

I've been doing a little diversification too (trying to follow my own advice), and I've gotten a couple of initial positions established in a couple of coins, but the bids are getting tougher to get filled - there's a couple where I still haven't picked up anything yet. The things I'm looking at are looking pretty solid, looking like they don't want to go lower, and I'm thinking I'm going to have to raise some bids . . .



On the question of should the DigiReports be weekly or monthly, just a couple of thoughts.

Firstly, it seems to me that reasonable expectations are fairly key. They can be stated expectations as well as implicit. In fact, I think we can say that for everything one might do to be explicit, there are still always implicit expectations that sometimes escape our initial thinking. In this particular case, I think an implicit implication for monthly reports would be that they would be more important since they are less frequent: imagine a month of "slow news", and the criticism that could arise for having reported so little for a monthly report. It would be the same thing that people now say about the weekly reports, but magnified by the fact that since they're monthly, they should be even better, longer, and more information packed. And God forbid a missed monthly report - we'd have all the "this coin's dead" and "the Devs abandoned the coin" folks over here in droves!

I’ve always been a big fan of the DigiReports since I consider them to be first and foremost one of the best ways to not only inform, but to also engage the community – not to mention what it does for the Devs themselves in keeping them in touch with the community as well. There are several win-wins that come with more frequent “interactions”, with the above being some of what I think are the most important.

I also think that a weekly update also implicitly sets lower expectations that allow for the production of reports that don’t always have to be “headline news”. Whereas monthly reports might imply more earth shaking news to meet expectations, I think we are more forgiving with a weekly report. Furthermore, with weekly reports, and this is precisely because they are more frequent and nobody expects revolutionary changes on a weekly basis, it is much more appropriate to even include the anecdotal and trite. Hey, it happens all around us every day: when there’s no news, the nightly news is sometimes nothing but “filler”, and it’s completely acceptable and understandable.

I’m in favor of weekly updates for all these reasons, even when they are seemingly trivial, and perhaps especially when they’re trivial - hey, I'm interested in everything about DigiByte, and it doesn't always have to be super serious. I’m interested in even the smallest details. For example, I’d love to know more about what Tyler is doing with his testing (even if it is over my head – I’m sure it can be told in an interestingly enough dumbed down manner that I would be entertained (and informed . . . to the degree that I can understand, of course). And then when there’s something more important to share, well that too, without a doubt!

In any event, I think there’s always something of interest that can be drummed up on a weekly basis, given the lower expectations (mainly just staying in touch), to be able to justify weekly updates, while the raised expectations of monthly updates just might end up having a boomerang effect, especially when you don’t have any rocket launches planned that month.  ;-)

Like EPLDCC said, DigiByte is truly decentralized (thanks, in great part, to the multi-algo coding), so when one user, even one "farm" goes down, the entire network is not affected. That is not the case with centralized networks (for whatever the reason they have become so, or why the devs planned them to be so from the beginning so that they could control and line their own personal pockets).

Nevertheless, even if a major part of the DGB network were to go down (here's another major advantage) the speed of confirmation and diff adjustments guarantees that the network will be back up and fully functional in practically no time at all (once the national power grid has been restored, or whatever caused the regional outage is fixed).

Here is a great synopsis from DigiReport #5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-haCDqhaTqc

And, as I said earlier, there's a ton of information out there that answers 99% of your questions and I encourage you to take the initiative to begin researching and learning more about, not just the details of DigiByte, but everything about cryptocurrencies from the basic theory and ethos to the actual day-to-day real life operations (and issues).

@all newcomers, this last piece of encouragement can be extended to one and all - this thread is becoming extremely cluttered with useless commentaries . . . and you can imagine just how much more difficult it will be for new people to find the answers to their questions (like you are trying to do) the more cluttered and nonsensical the thread gets, right?

Are you serious? Do you really have to ask that question?

How about to show everyone that you're not exactly what you accused me of being?

Because if you don't, that's what everyone will take you for.

I'd say that's pretty good, and very obvious, motivation.

As I said, good luck.

You know, you guys, where are you coming from? ETH?

You have my pity. I feel sorry for you.

Unfortunately I can't do much more.

Best wishes for a safe journey back home.

You've disqualified yourself by having to resort to libel and insult (and in the process projecting that it is you who has no clue).

. . . or perhaps you'd like to take a shot at showing why my very factually based scenario isn't possible.

Good luck with that, but I won't be holding my breath.

Someone's got 100,000,000 DGB sitting on Bittrex (104,627,028 to be exact).

That's a pretty penny . . . unless you're a whale of course.  


Good things happening to DigiByte.

And it's only getting started!

Really? And what about the concentration of hashing power and if just one of those major "farms" had a power outage? How many weeks, months, years might it be before the network becomes functional again? And would anyone give you a dime for it by that time?

Have you searched the thread using keywords for your questions? Have you watched all the DigiReports twice? Have you studied the available documentation? Have you read the DigiByte Group's press release? The fact that many of your questions are easily answered with little effort suggests not. Nobody here is your personal secretary, and to suggest otherwise could well be interpreted to be quite offensive. We all contribute what we can when we can. You can too, and that starts by educating yourself on your own, like we all have done. Nobody is going to invest the time to put all the links together to the answers you seek just because you're asking, much less bring forward information not ready to be published. Do you really think there is someone out there who's going to say, "hold everything, I've got to find this guy all the answers he wants"? Especially when they know your can do it quite easily on you own?

Nevertheless, this is not to say that a great wiki page with all those links shouldn't exist. Why don't you put your efforts into creating that list. Cryptocurrencies are embryonic you know. We're writing history as we go. We're certainly not overstaffed as you most certainly must have realized by now, and you could help, but it'll take rolling up your sleeves just like everyone else has.

You certainly would have my support with that kind of project. Something with links to all the factual data without subjective and opinionated bias would be wonderful. Tyke would be a likely project collaborator, that is if he doesn't want to publish a book that's out-of-date before it's even published . . .

@o0o0,

There's a difference between constructive criticism and disruption. I put you in the first category, but you can review the literature to confirm that I'm not mistaken. 

Nice to hear from you again. 

one of my all time favorites:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=408268.msg11807984;topicseen#msg11807984


(That's when it was only good 'ol barabbas, but now we might need to get even more competent and vigilant with the issue.)