The cryptometh address doesn't even have any deposits:

Mintpal voting is a scam?

I just watched BCT coin lose 10,000 votes right before my eyes. What the heck?

I've been in contact with the devs and new wallets are on the way that do not trigger kaspersky and other major antivirus programs.

Hopefully, they will have time to finalize a release soon.

And one last thing.

I'm off your thread. Later!

Sure. Do with it what you like.

I think it will make a nice wallet.

Now that I'm logged in as me...

Look, the patch is designed to be neutral relative to the function of the coin. Patched clients and not patched clients can coexist on the same network. The blockchain is good. The difference is that patched clients will not reject valid blocks, making the synchronization go smoother and strengthen the network. If you don't like that or some of the features out of fear of the unknown, then don't apply them.

You have several real devs here, it seems like, that can look over the changes. They'll verify that I didn't change anything about the core parameters of the coin. The real thing I changed was some validation code that was causing problems.

How do you force your way into an open source project?

No, the only thing I deleted were the posts where I mistakenly posted with the dev team account. I do not speak for the dev team of the other coin, so I had to delete those posts.

What are you talking about?

I accidentally posted from a dev team account and I regret it, trust me.

Sorry, that wasn't meant to be with the other account. That's a dev team account. My bad.

What the post said was that the devs here should read my post again.

Nothing is being forced. Everything is a suggestion and it's all being submitted as a pull request.

Why does everyone go nuts at every suggestion?

I'm testing my patches thoroughly now.

In about 5 hours, I will release a fix with some cool features and submit the entire thing as a pull request. My vote won't matter, but I vote to put it in. It's up to the long term ADT devs to figure out what to do with it.

At the same time, I'll release unofficial wallets for Windows and Mac. It's up to users to use them if they trust me. If not, they can build themselves. I wouldn't have changed parameters of the coin except to drop PoW in a month. The wallets will still be useful and behave exactly as all others in the short term (except that they will build a better network). If the ADT devs don't like my removing PoW, it's easy enough to comment out after they pull. But PoW is a security liability and it is only good for pump and dumpers. That's my 2 cents.

Along with dropping PoW, I suggest upping the APR (yearly) interest to 20 - 25% for PoS. The current rate is 3%, which is a bit low. Changing the APR is one or two changes in the code depending on how responsive they want the interest to be to the total number of minters. They'd need to make one change to make the rate really responsive and encourage adoption, or two changes to make the rate unresponsive and encourage bag holding. For the long term value of the coin and rewarding current ADT holders, probably the former (one change, responsive) is the better option.

I will probably submit my ideal changes as a separate pull request.

I've had a good look at ADT, and it's a good coin. Outside of ending PoW and raising the interest rate, I wouldn't change much else except to add wallet features.

Well, I've got a fix for exactly this problem that I'll submit as a pull request to your repo at the time I originally said. If Mullick is busy, you should use my pull. I've been really teasing you guys, but all that aside, just put in the fix and the other features and make this a better coin.

It doesn't have to do with being on the correct chain. That was simply a big mint and clients are rejecting it (not necessarily for being a big mint, per se). If that mint stays in the chain it will get rejected with the current clients. That's why you got the forks. So what do you do, take the transaction out of the chain?

That's a rhetorical question. No, you don't do that because you have to rewind the chain and really fork it.

Do you give the block a specific pass in the code?

That's also a rhetorical question. No, you don't do that because that doesn't really fix the underlying problem and a future issue like this is inevitable.

It's a valid block. Cryptsy didn't do anything wrong. It's the clients that are in error. They are rejecting perfectly good blocks. The correct answer is to fix the clients so they sync right up and people can stake as many coins as they have without worrying about forking the chain.

That's what I am here to do.

---

Other problematic blocks according to your clients: 19674, 20568

These types of blocks fragment the network and will cause forks sooner or later. They also drive away users.

That's not true. I tell you what, sync a fresh chain and tell me if it doesn't hang on block 55,126.

When it tries, watch your peers disappear. There are other problematic blocks and each will take it's bite out of your network.

And I know from the repo commits that your team knows about this issue.

What do you think happens to buy support when potential buyers try to sync a wallet and it starts hanging at 55,126? I'll tell you, they won't buy the coin. If you are wondering why the price has dropped, the inability to sync clients is one of the biggest causes.

And it will only get worse unless it is fixed because more problematic blocks will make it into the chain.

You got it.

But I am having a lot of fun watching these guys get nervous about my improving ADT.

What's up with that?

You think the users will like a dozen or so peers, nearly 100% confirmation of their stake minting, and timely processing of their transactions? If they do, they will download my wallets in 15 hours.

You don't like the features?

Clocks ticking. I've isolated the problem, added coin control, and added an addnode RPC for the console.

I may add some other features for fun if I get bored of waiting.

20 hours to go.

I can do it without a hard fork.

[edit]

As I said, if the changes are a secret and it's going to take a long time before they are released, I will proceed and wallets and a source will be available within 36 hours.

If you beat that time frame with your release, I won't offer anything.

Cryptsy and the community can decide for themselves.

If you want to maintain control, merge my changes back into your repo. I have no interest in taking control over this coin once it is fixed.

Look, he'll respond to you not me.

Just get him to put in an intermediate commit on the official repo, or put a link to the repo he is working from or at least post the details for everyone.

It's open source, so it's not like a fix would be a big secret.