Yes!..and given the manual input to action BTC purchases, it's a wonder they didn't see this up front.

Are they selling?.. Obviously that would be odd but perhaps the market needs to be fed?

I suspect not. New BTC are likely to be returned later. The statement of 30 days OR until sold out, likely stands.

I do agree 40% is excessive and perhaps suggests they badly underestimated real interest in this project.. speculative greed aside. It'll be interesting to see how many do just look to sell their safecoin.. Hopefully the majority are genuine and not speculators..but we do know there are many greedy shisters in all flavours of currency ATM, only volume in markets can control that.

But why is there a cap of 10% anyway???

@ Chang Hum et al.. You can be sore at MSC holders if you want but Mastercoin worked.. too well as it happened. So they went the route offered, so what..why not. If you missed out or were unable to contribute, being envious of those that did the bleeding obvious won't change reality.

Safecoin website still inviting BTC .. They should really close that off, if it is over.. or open up MSC again if they want to sell more than just 10%.

I think some of this is a forgivable error, few of us expected such a rush. A bit off putting that there are some heavy hitters in with 1000's of coins and they should have anticipated the differential getting BTC converted manually but still its a big positive that so many people are seeing the value of what they are offering. Hopefully they will honour the commitment relative to the 10% or not ..no difference from the 10% limit I think.

Disclaimer: drunk
I don't understand that .. What claim?.. the timing of MSC relative to BTC is known..first come first served.

A bit behind and trying to make sense of this..

Why don't they just release the 10% cap and honour the exchange for BTC and MSC suggested?.. or otherwise honour the commitment and do the math from timing of payments and lock out those that were too late??.. If MSC holders put the effort in and were quicker to transfer, why not go with that???... Some BTC transfers will have been OK relative to meeting the 10% limit. Disappointing for those that were late but this is a great offering by what has been detailed so far.. Still I don't understand the cap needs to be hard10% if there is already such strong demand.. Sell it all why not?

It's a long list and yet missing Counterparty XCP? Got Ethereum and not SafeCoin that launches.. is it 22nd Apr??

Yes, I don't know in Windoh's whether a folder might delete the existing folder or something clumsy that puts a non existent wallet in place of the existing one.. and then recreates it once it's started. OP unclear exactly what they did do, so user error seems likely.

Perhaps on first run, the Bitcoin client should warn users to make a wallet backup immediately and then also after sending bitcoins too. I wonder it would be worth even having it spawn many backups, whenever it generates new addresses from loose change.

OP's not been clear exactly but perhaps overwrote the client by unzipping a fresh version to the same place. User error, replace user and press any key to continue.

and what would you call that evolution?... perhaps you would call it MSC or XCP; or you would see an alt-Blockchain support that effort. I consider it's unimportant whether it's on BTC Blockchain or another. The only distinction perhaps comes with efforts such as Ripple that look to be very distinct and wholely different to Bitcoin.

Yes, seeing other replys from you, I wonder you're a bit behind on these 2.0 coins. I was at the same place a while back but it's worth another look. What is possible is now moving well beyond ye olde BTC.

These that you mistake as altcoins are distinct efforts relative to trade of assets, rather than being some simple currency alt-coin. Ethereum perhaps then is a third generation even but it's far too soon to see whether that or another similar effort, will move beyond Distributed Companies. Perhaps take a look at BitShares.org and others for a clearer sense of what more these offer.

I agree with you that copy-coins can burn in hell but then recognise that even for those there are some that have potential, as simple alternatives.. regular people seem to like choice, regardless of any technical reality.

Doubting Bitcoin the currency perhaps is an easy error, as a businessman though he certainly should and perhaps will better understand Bitcoin2.0 Meta/Protocol == asset and trade opportunities.. MSC; XCP; NXT; PTS+DACs; and Ethereum etc have real prospects. It's a cheap shot of course but perhaps he's looking for a quick win rather than any medium term prospect.

and prompted by that thread above, I posted similar to Ethereum forum, though no-one's replied and that forum is relatively quiet atm.. http://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/681/say-many-cpu-many-gpu-make-powerful-machine

Perhaps an option to highlight threads created by established members or a way for user to suggest a threshold, below which new threads are hidden to them. Obviously, ignoring individual users works but I wonder the difference that just excluding new threads from those with less that X activity might be helpful. The current icons on the left of threads suggesting ?hot topics, aren't useful - perhaps those could highlight heros; friends; and users with less that 8 digit IDs  

That's the kind of stupidity that fuels all conflict in the world. If you can't see other people's perspective, then you are the problem. The world isn't here to satisfy only what you want. As above, a sub forum that does cater for that other clutter, might help that 'problem'.

Perhaps better to suggest just having an "Alternate cryptocurrencies" > "Development & Technical Discussion" subforum?
However, Bitcoin 'generic' "Development & Technical Discussion" does make a lot of sense, despite those who see others as impure.
"Bitcoin Protocol and Reference Client" is a rather limiting.

Should Ripple not also be marked as [** Significantly Premined]?..