Sign me up.

The one thing missing from these coins is the lack of attention to protecting the social network. It's like if you want to earn Bitcoins where do you go? You can't even find jobs paying people in Bitcoins but we know there are a lot of hoarders just sitting on thousands of Bitcoins. At the same time there are barely any job boards or anything else and the majority of jobs which exist seem to be for computer technicians and programmers.

So I think it's time to actually build infrastructure and create the jobs base for Netcoin using investment syndicates. Basically lets say you run a business and you agree to start paying your people in Netcoins, shouldn't this be known to the syndicate and result in some kind of discounts? What about a social networking site similar to linkedin but pseudo-anonymous?

When I want to hire someone why is it so hard to find them? So hard to set up a contract or smart contract?

Because there is no craigslist, no jobs board, no linkedin, none of this exists for the community and stuff like that would greatly help the community thrive and boost market cap more than anything else. We can't all be miners and developers.  This is an example of what I mean https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157548.msg1668632#msg1668632

I think a rise to $500,000 is unrealistic. $50,000 is probably the max we will see before something else comes along to replace Bitcoin. It takes a long time for market cap to rise that much.

Until we can work for Bitcoins there will be problems with people unable to spend them. So what has to be implemented so that anyone can work for Bitcoins?

Elaborate. Because the correlation holds for all coins. Coins which have a very high market cap but very low supply end up having a very high price. This is a fact and you can look at the graphs and see. Novacoin is the same technology but going for $4 a coin with a smaller market cap because of what? Because there are a lot less Novacoins because Novacoin is newer and inflating slower.

Unfortunately I have to agree with you but I don't think it will take 5 years. I don't think his algorithm is quite that bad but it all depends on what happens this summer. The fate of PPC is determined this summer by what people do with their GPUs and ASICS. If my understanding is correct then only more hashing power being thrown at PPC can slow the rate of inflation.

In my opinion if it does not happen this summer then I will sell, but I predict it will happen this summer because the ASICS are coming and PPC is SHA256. That will have an impact.

Market cap is determined by total coins in circulation and the price of the coin. FTFY
And I hope you do see the difference.
[/QUOTE]

Price is correlated with market cap and the total coins in circulation. Meaning if the market cap is very high then a lot of people are likely to want to use the coin which means demand goes up but supply is low so the price goes up. That is my theory. I don't think the price mysteriously determined by any other mechanism than supply and demand but typically demand is a result of market cap.


Never said it was free, but it's cheaper and wiser to mine a coin when difficulty increases control the rate of inflation. Why buy something which loses value when you can mine something which gains value? It has to do with Sunny King's unusual algorithm.

Just watch, in the next week the price is going to go down even more and it's all because the inflation rate increases while the market cap is shrinking that you have the signal that this about to happen. The supply is going to increase while the demand will decrease which lowers the price. This will continue to happen until the difficulty rises in such a way that the supply doesn't increase faster than demand.

Take a look at these examples https://hashrack.com/hashpacks/buy https://cloudhashing.com/

We are moving into an era of virtual rigs. The technical expertise to set up these rigs is moving up into the top 1% of graduate students and engineers. How many of us can design an ASIC or put an ASIC together? How many of us can configure an FGPA? How many of us even know what FGPA is?

What I'm talking about is MaaS (Mining as a Service) replacing individual miners and mining pools. If you set up a cloud the first thing you should do is set yourself up as an L3C or Cooperative so that people don't think you're just in it to get rich and for greed. The Coop/collective should offer shares similar to ASICminer but the reason it should not be an LLC and instead has to be L3C or Coop is because decentralization of hashing power should be a common interest of all Mining as a Service entities because if this is not given priority then cryptocurrencies cannot survive. An L3C is a social enterprise which can allow you to get rich while also legally requiring you to pursue the mission of keeping the hashing power decentralized.


I think a Coop would work well too but a traditional corporation would not work well and could easily be turned against the community interest. This is why we have people who think Butterfly labs or some ASIC company could build an ASIC and then mine in secret. This level of distrust can only be removed if the ownership of the Coop or L3C is distributed to many individuals. A syndicate is a way to decentralize hashing and also to allow any individual to buy shares in the investment syndicate and now they own shares in the entire business network. Essentially the community would have a way of owning itself and regulating itself so that governments don't have the excuse to.

ASICminer got it right to offer shares. They are also getting it right by releasing block erupters and trying to decentralize the hashing power. But they get it wrong in some ways too. The main way they got is wrong is with this virtual pass through share stuff which requires you to buy shares with only Bitcoins and you don't even know for sure that you own it, all centralized around a few sites too etc. The shares and contracts have to be real and legally binding. I understand this was the only way to do it at the time and Netcoin might end up doing the same but I wish we could see Netcoin companies on NASDAQ someday with the investment syndicate handling all the details of buying into IPO's and protecting shareholders.

In my opinion it should be a syndicate of different kinds of Mining as a Service Coops and L3Cs who early adopters buy shares in prior to the launch of Netcoin. These early adopters along with these Mining as a Service Coops should also buy shares in the umbrella syndicate giving them voting rights similar to how shareholders have voting rights in ASICminer. The kind of stuff to vote on would be which companies are allowed to join the syndicate? If they are accepted in then they are certified by the syndicate. To be accepted into the syndicate they have to sell a portion of shares of their company to the syndicate.

This should not just take place on some virtual way like with ASICminer, I'm saying we should own actual stocks in companies and then have the profit from those stocks distributed as dividends to all the members who own shares in the investment syndicate. This means the investment syndicate could invest in your business to start a mining pool but you would have to agree to certain guidelines to receive that investment. Once investment occurs then the newsletter is sent out to members saying that your company has just been certified with a community seal of approval and to trust your company and to bring resources, support, human resources, buy shares or buy whatever it is you're selling.

A pool which is set up without being certified by the syndicate would not be considered a part of the trusted network. It would not receive investment, it would not receive marketing, and would be on it's own.  To address P2P Pool based on this definition P2Pool is a decentralized Bitcoin mining pool that works by creating a peer-to-peer network of miner nodes., a decentralized mining pool would be fine but the problem once again is if I want to buy shares and don't have the expertise to mine because I'm a doctor and I don't know anything about computers but I have enough money to see it's an investment to make, how exactly would I invest in a P2P Pool and get ROI? If it's cloud hashing Coop and it's certified by the most trusted entity which is the syndicate then as a doctor I would recognize that it's very similar to how lawyers have to pass the bar and how doctors have to be licensed. I would immediately know that I could trust that particular cloud based hashing company and would invest. The cloud based hashing company would take my money, buy mining equipment on my behalf which I'd legally own, they'd configure it all for me, they'd mine Netcoins for me or any coin I tell them to, and they'd deliver the profit directly to my Netcoin address or even directly into my checking account. They could even offer to automatically take money from my paycheck in recurring fashion to constantly upgrade. In this way the investor doesn't have to think of mining as any different from any other investment and when that happens then everyone will do it that way.

Price is determined by market cap and the total coins in circulation. If PPcoin has more total coins in circulation than the market cap then the price of each coin will remain under a dollar. The inflation rate of PPcoin is still high, this means if you're waiting for PPcoins to be worth a dollar anytime soon the difficulty will have to go up sharply within months along with the market cap.

There are 19 million PPcoins but PPcoin has a shrinking market cap which just lost 11.02%!

Just have a look at the charts. http://coinmarketcap.com/

This is a signal to mine PPcoins but do not buy them because the price is going to drop into the single digits soon. Mine them while the difficulty is very low and the inflation rate is high, because eventually the difficulty will be high and you'll have no choice but to buy. The main focus of the PPcoin community should be to increase market cap as quickly as possible. Get businesses to accept PPcoin and build businesses around PPcoin or the prices will continue to drop on your investment if you bought PPcoins.

I think you misunderstand the implications of what I'm saying. The purpose of a syndicate is to protect the network on the technical level (keep hashing power decentralized), and on the social level (protect the individual members from scams, protect profits, etc). These two innovations are not currently offered by Bitcoin, Litecoin or any other coin. Netcoin can differentiate itself by forming the kind of community that tries to look out for it's members because it's members are the network.

The free market is a jungle. In a jungle you have to protect yourself or die. Netcoin is in the position where it's going to have to protect itself and security does not just mean use a new hashing algorithm. New hashing algorithms or even a combination of hashing algorithms can help but technical security can only take you so far. Eventually the economic incentive will be enough that someone will invent an ASIC, and the economic incentive probably will be enough for someone from the Litecoin community to switch the massive GPU farm over. It's these big players with massive amounts of hashing power who will change the dynamics no matter how you slice it. The only solution I have is to accept that these individuals will exist and regulate it it in some way so that you don't end up with for example massive private Litecoin GPU farms waiting for the moment Netcoin launches and then mining it into oblivion while ordinary Joe Sixpack never stands a chance.

The way to even it out is to allow ordinary Joe Sixpack to start saving his money today, right now, to prepare for the launch, and set up an L3C or collective cloud based rig which sells shares to people like him. Do it right and anyone will be able to join in on the big launch even if they have no mining experience at all and no rig. Tell me why this would be bad and why it would be better to concentrate it into people who have mining experience and expertise to build massive rigs? Of course it would be best if everyone could be a miner but as cryptocurrencies become more mainstream it's going to have to include more people than just computer engineers and IT wizards.

The god of the market decides nothing. Human beings decide everything. We are dealing with information here, digits, nothing more. The ability to crunch those digits is being centralized into an elite and this is bad for cryptocurrencies in general and it's not going to be solved by appealing to the free market god. It will only be solved by creating the necessary structure so that decentralization can take place. The centralization of hashing power is due to the design of SHA256 and of Bitcoin itself which due to Moore's law will result in an ever increasing centralization of hashing power.

The lack of foresight of the community is also what led to Mt Gox and the centralization of the exchange mechanism. Only now after the fact is the community saying a decentralized exchange is needed. The free market by itself does nothing unless it's directed by human beings. So why not organize to use the free market to vote on the fate of Netcoin?


That is not what I said at all. I never said technical features make a currency popular. I argued against that. I'm saying the social network makes the currency popular and the investment and mining syndicate make the currency profitable and that if the syndicate does not protect the social network which protects the currency then nothing protects the currency and no amount of technical feature can change that. Ultimately Netcoin will be protected by the Netcoin community and organizing to do this early on makes sense if it's supposed to last and be competitive because the Bitcoin community by that time will be elite and will not help other cryptocurrencies as you're seeing with the venture capital flowing into Bitcoin specific companies and Bitcoin specific technology leaving Litecoin and PPcoin to reinvent the wheel all over again for the benefit of those who own a lot of Bitcoins. That is the free market, but those who own a lot of Netcoins might want to have the same businesses, wallets and infrastructure in their community and it's not necessarily going to be a good idea or even possible to rely on Bitcoin businesses to support the Netcoin community because they might not own any Netcoins and could easily decide against it and then what? No online wallets? No debit cards? No exchanges? None of the essential sites that make market cap go up?


I think in the long term you can forget about ASIC and FGPA resistance. You can perhaps try and delay it but for what? In the long term it's going to go the same way and hashing power will be centralized due to Moore's law as I indicated before and it's only going to speed up in the future too. My opinion is that the hashing power should be decentralized and that a syndicate can form and make that a priority so that centralized hashing resistance isn't just built in as a technological feature but also as a sociological trend and legal resistance as well. Notice I did not claim specific technologies should be resisted, like ASIC, or FGPA. The reason why is let's say it is ASIC resistant and can only be mined on the CPU, what stops someone from using Amazon CPU farms or from setting up a $100,000 cloud farm with Silicon Valley venture capital and instead of doing it in the interest of the community they do it specifically to centralize the hashing power into the control of Google or whomever their investors are? Do you now see the problem is centralized hashing as a trend and the technology used is irrelevant?

Define market confidence, and how do you even know this? Is this based on what is actually happening because I see GPU farms popping up everywhere mining even the sort of alt coins which are just released. These farms are private meaning you and I don't get a share in any of the profits, and they act to centralize hashing power
into fewer and fewer hands. Yes I do believe Netcoin will be released and the private GPU/CPU mining farms with ridiculous hash rates will focus directly in on it.

The free market? We are the free market. We as in if we form a syndicate and become a collective entity then we can vote in the free market. If we do not form any legal entity and do not have any mechanism to control the market or the hashing power or anything else then what are you talking about? Are you saying Netcoin should just be released and that everyone will stand back and watch? What I predict is that on day one it's going to be hit with so much hashing power so fast that it's not going to even be like what you expect.

We are talking 2014? So if Bitcoin is $1000 and the Bitcoin ATM's are starting to spread, and Litecoins are $50, and so on, and the market caps of these coins are in the billions or hundreds of millions, you're telling me they wont already be organized? If you go with GPU then you'll have to deal with the Litecoin community which already is organized and already has businesses with GPU's and FGPA's selling shares and going to the cloud. So they can just point all their hashing power at Netcoin and take it instantly before Netcoin can form an identity of it's own. If Netcoin uses SHA256 then Bitcoin with it's venture capital backed LLC's will swoop in and take Netcoin.

I'm not against the free market, I just don't think Netcoin is going to have it as easy as Bitcoin and Litecoin because when Bitcoin and Litecoin launched the majority of people did not know what cryptocurrencies were, venture capitalists weren't involved, billionaires like Bill Gates weren't taking notice. By the time Netcoin gets involved Bitcoin will be mainstream and Litecoin will be where Bitcoin is right now. Netcoin is going to have to compete with PPcoin for third place and PPcoin is starting to get organized and build up it's community which means Netcoin is going to have to start organizing right now or you're right it could be DOA no matter what technology it comes with.

Technology alone does not increase market cap. Hype, organization, and starting businesses around the technology is what increases market cap. So the time to hype and start businesses is right when Netcoin development begins and we know what the technology is. The time to plan to build Netcoin centric cloud based hashing rigs is now, because if you don't someone else will and I really don't see how you can stop the hashing arms race now that Moore's law has kicked in. The only solution I have is to organize it into syndicates, decentralize those, and then offer shares, so that even if Netcoin does end up getting swamped by hashing power, and even if it's a hashing arms race scenario, that at least you'll always be able to buy shares no matter how much technical expertise or money you have to spend.

You wont have to worry about how expensive rigs become. You wont have to worry about electricity costs. You wont have to worry about any of that. Just like how we went from people hosting their own web servers in their house to paying web companies to host for them to hosting it in the cloud to virtual machines and VPS. Netcoin hashing power will be hosted in the cloud and you can cite this post of mine when Netcoin is released and see if I was right.

Right now its still over priced but it will eventually reach $1 probably sometime this year.

What you don't understand about my post because you're so focused on "red flag words" and it sounds 1%ish,  is the fact that by the time this coin releases the cryptocurrency landscape will be very different.

Individuals aren't going to be in the mining business like they are now. There will be huge farms set up run by businesses who will simply point their hashing power at this coin or any other coin. So anything other than a syndicate, collective, or organized release, is not going to be fair.

How is it fair if you and I have let's say 1200Mhash/s but we can't get any coins at all because the moment of the IPO 5 corporations with farms all point their hashing power at it? ASICminer whether you like what they did or not has permanently changed the way things are done. If we don't have to worry about technical details and can just buy shares in a rig that is part of the Netcoin network certified by the community then what is the issue with that? How can it get more fair than that?

At the same time if we remain unorganized then you'll never achieve a high market cap in a short amount of time. Market cap is a result of organization, people starting businesses, hiring each other, etc. I'm advocating that we start the businesses in parallel to the development of the coin. I used the word syndicate precisely because that is the word that businesses use to describe it. IPO is also a word businesses use. Marketing is also a word used by businesses, so what?

Here is the point, many people are anti-business, but being a business owner should not be considered a bad thing. It should not associate you with the 1% to want to be a business owner. It should not associate you with the 1% to want to be an investor. If you set the business up correctly, in the right legal form, it will benefit the community by providing jobs and building up infrastructure as a whole while organizing the community. Netcoin, Bitcoin or any other coin cannot be a success without a syndicate (use another word if you like) built around it.

Bitcoin has the foundation, but that foundation is really only set up to pay for development and isn't doing anything at all to pay for infrastructure. This left a big hole for venture capitalists and individuals actually from the 1% to take control of critical businesses so that over time they'll own all the shares in the important businesses which provide critical infrastructure instead of individuals like you and me.

What I propose is that individuals like you and me own shares in the syndicate itself which will support the community and build infrastructure for the benefit of it's shareholders in pursuit of it's mission. This sounds very business like, but if the idea is bad please give a better reason to dislike it other than it's language. It's kind of like saying some was a bad idea because the language sounds too liberal. Either the idea can work, or not, and that should decide.


This is the argument I'm trying to make. I'm saying we should organize right now so that we can start buying shares in stuff like that prior to launch so that when it does launch no one can say it wasn't fair. If you bought your shares in the syndicated mining rig then you'll guarantee to get dividends etc. This would build excitement right now and cause people to start businesses prior to Netcoin even being officially launched. By the time Netcoin launches it will be the most anticipated launch in altcoin history.

Or we can take the usual approach taken by PPcoin and others and just release the coin knowing it has the best technology and then just wait for a community to form around it. By the way I'm also willing to buy both shares in the Netcoin IPO or in a hashing company provided that the company is set up as a limited profit company (or maybe a collective?) and is accepted by the community. The reason I like the idea of syndication is so that people will know which companies are certified and which are potentially scams, or invested in or trusted by the community or not invested in and trusted by the community.


This depends on how tacotime chooses to do it. Closed source will not be a popular decision but at the same time if it doesn't stay closed source for long it might not matter. It matters for how long it's going to be closed source. Honestly it's better to release it all open source from the start but if that is technologically difficult to impossible then open source it in stages with set dates which do not change.

Such as approximately X weeks after initial release, the source will be completely open. Then the community can say if it's not released open by that time they will ditch the coin.



Hear me out, mining pools are old tech which came about after GPU power wasn't enough for people to solo mine as individuals. Mining farms or cloud mining syndicates are new tech which are coming to replace mining pools because soon most individuals will not be able to mine with profitability at all as the technical and accounting burden may become too much. If the security of Netcoin is based upon a distributed group of miners, in my opinion a syndication of the mining network would provide decentralization of the hashing power, while also providing farms which handle all of the technical issues so that individuals can simply hash in the cloud and only worry about paying a portion of their paycheck into these farms. These farms could accept credit, debit or whatever else and even grandma could own a share or two. I see that as the way forward. If you want to solo mine you still can but how if Bitcoin is mainstream at the time you're gonna have people throwing $20,000 into a room full of rigs and eventually these people will become the new median solo miner and even if you keep the pool infrastructure the pool still requires you to purchase, configure, and run your own mining hardware and what if you simply don't have the connections to get an ASIC, the technical expertise to build an ASIC, or the money at the time? If you set it up so people mine in the cloud then any amount of money, even $50 would get them something. This would remove the burden of technical expertise and connections and make mining more like an investment that anyone could get into just by buying the shares and when it's that simple then there will be much more hashrate overall and it would benefit the security of Netcoin as I understand it.

But who will certify these farms or hash clouds as being officially endorsed or not endorsed so that grandma knows which ones benefit the Netcoin economic eco-system and which ones are set up just to make money? By using alternative corporate legal entities such as collectives and syndicates or L3C's this can give us the assurance to know that. The syndicate would bring trust, which is something Bitcoin does not really have as a lot of people myself included have been scammed. It also would act to prevent power from concentrating into one mining farm or cloud hash service because if they are all L3C's you cannot have a MtGox type situation.

Who and how many does this demurrage apply to? Based on my understanding if it's going to apply to everyone then it's not ethical and it's just a tax.

I think the theory is flawed because it can't work unless it only applies to the top top top richest 1%. So yeah we might have to encourage Satoshi to invest some of his Bitcoins but considering how evenly distributed Litecoins and PPcoins are I don't really see a point to having to encourage people to invest.

I'm not completely against demurrage in theory if we actually seem to have an elite that doesn't want to reinvest but right now we don't have that. I think if we did have demurrage it should only apply to the top 1% of any cryptocurrency.

This would mean someone like Satoshi should have to worry about demurrage because he has millions of coins and there are only ever going to be 21 million to exist. The vast majority of us should never have to worry about it. It would take an individual holding millions of coins before it should kick in for Litecoin or PPcoin. The more coins there are, the more coins it should take to kick in. It should be based on the percentage of the total coins the individual has.That is how I think the demurrage system should work.

To sum up what I'm saying, I think Freicoin gets it wrong. I think demurrage should exist but it should be tied in with Proof of Stake. Just take PPcoin and turn the code upside down so that if you hold a whole lot of coins for a long time then there is a chance that you could lose 1-5% of them. This would be a fair deflationary form of demurrage that I would support because I agree with you we do need to encourage large stake holders to reinvest in the community by force if necessary for the benefit of protecting the coin, building infrastructure and cryptocurrencies. I don't think the 99% should have to worry about that though. The 99% should be encouraged to save, which is why the currency should be deflationary along with the demurrage to prevent a 1% elite attack from dominating and destroying the community.  

Since when did people have to be encouraged to spend money? People should be encouraged to invest, and save but not spend.

I disagree with you here. If we form a syndicate now then we can determine through the syndicate how the coins are distributed via PoW. What I'm saying is it does not have to be a traditional company. It can be a 501(c) for instance or my preferred choices for the a Netcoin syndicate which would be either an L3C, a benefit corporation, or a cooperative, in that order.


Various legal organizational options for a Netcoin syndicate -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_corporation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_Purpose_Corporation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_interest_company
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L3C


Let's look at the L3C (low profit corporation)


This can have benefits for a syndicate. The charities can actually be charities which benefit the Bitcoin community as a whole or which benefit Internet freedom in general.
It also provides the corporation with a social purpose.

The point I'm making with this is you're right, it's only a matter of time before big corporations come in with their mining farms. That is why a syndicate of L3C's or cooperatives should form from the start and arrange to sell shares in the mining farm to the community. These shares just as with ASICMiner shares should probably start out cheap at first, and as mining ramps up they should pay for itself in the form of dividends. The reason to choose LC3 instead of a typical corporate structure is because the goal of the syndicate (at least this top level) should be more about social welfare of the Netcoin and cryptocurrency communities. It also means the syndicate could be supported by investment from charities, so that donations to it would reduce the tax burden. I want to say I'm not a lawyer or legal expert, it just seems like a clever idea to consider.

The other idea is to form a decentralized Netcoin global miners cooperative. Let investors buy shares in the cooperative similar to what Hashrack does. Basically what I'm saying is it's beneficial to let people from the community form a syndicate to distribute the hashing power. This would make it so that large corporations cannot just come in and steal the hashing power from the community. The community would simply have to set up their corporations as LC3, CIC or something the syndicate certifies as acceptable so that while their mining corporation is allowed to profit, that the profitability isn't the only consideration and that the profitability of any individual mining corporation is limited so that it remains decentralized.

Cryptocurrency Design is great. I have a better idea though. We should have design contests and reward the winner. Similar to the X-prize. The design has to be peer reviewed but if it wins the contest then it should win the bounty. The contest and bounty system should only be for really difficult problems.

That is why I propose the idea of a Netcoin investment/mining syndicate. Even before this coin is developed we can form the syndicate, build alliances, and create tactical or strategic protections for investors and miners. But first we will need a way to determine who the investors are so that the shares can be locked in to certain wallets and digital signatures etc.

What if for example you start offering shares in your GPU mining farm prior to the release of Netcoin and charge? This would allow people to get in very early. At the same time all of this has to be coordinated under a syndicate, meaning the different pool and GPU farm operators who support Netcoin have to be in communication with each other on a mailing list.

The idea of a design wiki is perfect. Someone should set that up ASAP and put all of our best ideas into it. Then we can simply revise these ideas as we get closer to the launch.


The ideas I proposed are
1. Following the IPO process and offering shares to early investors to attract them to Netcoin (these ideas are detailed in this thread).
2. Keep the coin scarce either by capping the total number to half of what Bitcoin will be or by keeping the inflation rate/generation rate so low that it has the same effect in that it's always more scarce than Bitcoin (Tacotime says after 30 years let the democratic process take over and vote on the rate of inflation).
3. Create a Netcoin syndicate prior to the launch composed of early investors and miners. Anyone who buys shares in the IPO process would be part of this syndicate, and anyone who sets up a mining pool GPU farm would become part of this syndicate, which basically would be built around a mailing list and perhaps a Facebook group etc. (more about this idea is on other threads but I think it's essential to form it early on so that Netcoin isn't cloned, and so that Netcoin can fend for itself politically as well as protect the interest of shareholders/members/contributors etc).

So the first step is we need a media wiki. Who wants to create it? The next step is we need to input all the best ideas from the forum onto the wiki. We may need to set up a poll for certain controversial ideas, and in other cases tacotime should just decide one way or the other.

As I said before, the purpose of PPcoin isn't to be like Bitcoin but to be something better. It's got better security, it's more energy efficient, it's potentially more deflationary. PPcoin is just a better idea, but whether or not it can work is up for grabs. Litecoin on the other hand exists as it does because of a design flaw in Bitcoin where if everyone tried to use Bitcoin for micro-transactions there would be all kinds of problems with it, and also the fact that because it requires so many confirmations that perhaps Bitcoin is too secure for adoption. I don't believe Litecoin will last because it's not better than Bitcoin as a technology and is mainly just hyped up because it appeals to GPU miners, but the community likes Litecoins so I will have to support it for now.

That being said, it's about cryptocurrencies and not Bitcoin in specific. Bitcoin is the first but it wont be the best technology. This means if someone didn't get in on Bitcoin as an early adopter they'll probably get in on the successor. Those who are late to cryptocurrencies in general will be the ones who are unlucky.

No I don't believe only Bitcoiners are taking it to the political distribution system. Anyone who is locked out of the system will have incentive to find alternative survival strategies and lifestyles. Considering how many young people are without jobs and without hope of surviving in the current system as it is, either the current system has to be changed by the young jobless or the young jobless will not survive. For that reason there will be a lot of young people adopting cryptocurrencies as a way to survive the unsustainable political based economy.

I disagree with you. I think there are plenty of Bitcoins (21 million is enough for all of us). I believe this because I believe at some point a dollar can be worth a Satoshi, and if a dollar is worth a Satoshi then you have way plenty of Bitcoins. You aren't entitled to a whole Bitcoin any more than you are entitled to a million dollars. Go earn more if you want more than what you started with. We can blame Bitcoin only for not having the infrastructure to allow us to earn more, but I don't think we need more total Bitcoins. If you work and earn more Bitcoins then you can get more and that is all, that is sufficient for me at least.

I do not support arbitrary inflation of cryptocurrencies. I do support PPcoin, I'm not much of a fan of Litecoin but I do understand that with Bitcoin not really dealing in small transactions that Litecoin may actually be necessary. I do believe that Litecoin should have had the same total number as Bitcoin or perhaps half, because I believe the time to sell Litecoins is the moment it surpasses the total number of Bitcoins in the market.

Bitcoins are at 11 million? If there are more than 11 million Litecoins right now but Litecoins have a smaller market cap than Bitcoins the smart thing to do right now would be to trade your Litecoins for Bitcoins right now. PPcoins on the other hand are a completely different technology, at some point it could be worth more than Bitcoins or less depending on whether or not Proof of Stake works. If Proof of Stake works then PPcoin will surpass Bitcoin due to lower transaction fees and the security by design against 51% attacks along with the energy efficiency and the fact that as more people adopt it, it becomes even more deflationary than Bitcoin in some ways (because saving/hoarding it actually mints new coins by Proof of Stake).