No response yet, he is usually pretty quick to respond, so I would assume he may be away from his desk. I will let you know as soon as I get a response.

Edit: He just got back to me, should be fixed soon.

Thanks RJF, checking into it.

Any chance of getting the Pool back online? Been out since yesterday evening at least.. Thx!

Thanks wiser for your perspective. The only time I consider gender when interacting online is when I have to choose between a male or female pronoun. I really believe English would benefit from a gender-neutral second-person pair of pronouns for objective and subjective roles. I've never been able to guess gender by the quality or informativeness of posts. I think if I've got any chance of guessing anything, it is age / maturity. And those two don't always correspond.

What I do believe in very strongly is a term I call "social filters". This is where the nature of some activity or gathering attracts some people, and repels others. Inevitably the group will share some common traits, behaviours, interests, skills, and often culture or beliefs. The narrower the group or activity is, the stronger the social filter, and the more defined these similarities are. My experience is that when such a group only meets physically, and where the natural filter has a strong gender bias, the minority gender becomes less interested in attending and this multiplies the effect over time until the group is almost exclusively one gender. I think this is because gender is instantly visible in most cases.

For aspects that are not instantly visible, such as belief systems, the social filter effect remains the same, but there is no multiplying effect of people leaving because they are the minority. So in a group of poets that regularly met for years, conversation might one day reveal that the majority are Buddhists, and there are only a few agnostic or Christian members. Had people been wearing clothes to signify their religion, I believe over the preceding few years, those other religious minorities would have reduced in or completely left the group.

This is one of the things that I really like about the Internet. It enables people to participate in forums without providing any of the information points used to discriminate whether that be a conscious or subconscious process. I am never bothered when I discover someone has chosen a moniker or avatar that completely misrepresents their gender or other personal information. And because of this, I ignore as best I can information that is implied by monikers and avatars.

This information neutrality that comes automatically with online activity is why I get confused with comments about gender exclusion or bias in online communities. I understand that higher profile figures may find it harder to suppress information like their gender, but by then, aren't they already entrenched in the community? So my feeling, naive as it likely is, thinks that the imbalance of gender participation in cryptocurrency is caused by what attracts genders to the industry. Certainly some of this might be the cascade effect of men in the industry talking shop with other men more than women, and less women currently in a position to attract more women by talking shop. But I also feel there is truth to the theories that the feeder industries of fintech and software developers are already heavily gender biased. Maybe even all of those male taxi drivers are having some effect, though in my opinion they chat regardless of gender.

So while I'd like to see every cryptocurrency forum be as welcoming as the DNotes thread, I think a lot more is required to obtain the gender balance the future of cryptocurrency needs. Where any industry is underrepresented by a gender, I believe there is a lot of value in establishing and supporting minority-gender networking opportunities and professional organisations. I believe these opportunities already exist in both the fintech and software professions. So my recommendation is for the cryptocurrency community to actively reach out to these minority-gender groups and offer information sessions and presentations on the cryptocurrency industry. This could be incredibly effective if the numbers are close to what I suspect.

Lets assume for the sake of simple mathematics that 1 in 20 people in fintech and software are women. And lets say 1 in 1,000 people in these industries are as familiar with cryptocurrency as people would be after attending three presentations on the subject. Then let's say that half of the women in these industries are members of a gender-minority networking group and attend cryptocurrency information sessions. Lets also assume that the combined industry members totals 1,000,000 people. Then, after three cryptocurrency sessions I think the following formula would be correct:

Before:
Men in industry =  950,000
Women in industry = 50,000

Men understand CC =  950
Women understand CC = 50

After:
Men understand CC =                     950
Women understand CC = 50,000 x 50% = 25,000

Suddenly after providing information sessions to the minority group, it outnumbers the previous majority by 25:1

Certainly my figures are not at all accurate, but this does represent how the principle of targeting the support groups for minorities can have a significant effect when the information being provided is generally not well understood.

Weirdly enough I've never had any major issues with being a woman in this industry. It's very possible that it was fortuitous that I picked a gender-neutral moniker for this forum. I've had lots of people assume I was male (calling me "mate," referring to me as "he," etc.) and I haven't made a point to correct them. I've also never yet attended any sort of actual event in this industry where real people get together. I guess I love the part where you don't have to dress up and go anywhere, but can comfortably do your trading, forum chatting, networking, etc., all from the comfort of your own home, and often with a baby on the lap. In that sense, this is probably the most mom-friendly industry I've ever worked in!

https://moneyish.com/ish/all-the-reasons-why-women-can-be-the-future-of-cryptocurrency/

Really nice article on the gender problem in Crypto. Particularly relevant to this board, given CryptoMoms.

http://httpS://dnotesvault.com/ or http://dnotesvault.com/ true link, or both?

Those are great points too. I think the reason the banks are slow and expensive when it comes to wire transfers (especially to customers) is in part because they can. Up to now they have not had any competition so no need to refine those processes. But when it comes to taking my money, they are fast. It takes seconds to process a credit card payment, for example. In other words, I think wire transfers, ACH deposits, and all other kinds of bank account to bank account transfers could be done faster and cheaper using the current infrastructure. And now with the block chain entering the scene as a competitor they will. At that point we'll be able to more objectively evaluate which system is truly better for those metrics.

You're right about system downtime, though that's not entirely unheard of in block chain based payment systems

This is a great article explaining what Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are, and why they are valuable, why they might turn out to not be valuable. It's probably one of the best nontechnical explanations for the entire cryptocurrency phenomenon I've read in a long time. I learned a lot reading it.

https://blog.chain.com/a-letter-to-jamie-dimon-de89d417cb80

With all respect to all Note members, how people can be convinced that some development is going on

I’ve championed this coin for so long. Done videos, tweets etc etc.

I visit here from time to time, and see these very long well worded comments, and responses.. which is nice.

What about DNOTES? What about 2.0?

Very close to selling and moving on.

Chapter 6 Concepts 1 & 2

Yes, crypto matters and that seems to be the problem, they are scared of it. Your evaluation does not go far enough. It could be blue cars or peanut butter or widgets. The point is the government should not have the right to make you report to them just because you own a thing or hold a currency or have a difference of opinion. Yes, Bitcoin is being noticed and growing exponentially but, knee jerk reactions by clueless government officials, especially the ones we elected to look out for our interests are not healthy.

What's to stop them from saying every citizen who disagrees with them must be registered? Whats to stop them from saying Bitcoin is illegal and punishment for holding it will be as a major crime? They are operating on "knee jerk" principles, they really don't understand what is going on only that it is growing and that scares them.

This law, if enacted will take away your right to privacy, free speech and the ability to simply own something that is not (yet) illegal.  Here is the email of Senator Feinstein:

https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Write her and express your opinion. Be courteous and intelligent but get your point across: We will not stand for the criminalization of Bitcoin nor will we stand for reporting the ownership of something that is not illegal.  

If you don't "nip it in the bud" it will grow to smother you and everyone around you.

I think this is good news Crypto currency is not a hack toy anymore. The government are making ad to really compare it to FIAT, because now crypto matters.

hii @DNotes is coinomi multi wallet support for note?

Working on the next chapter of Four Pillars videos, Chapter 6 is now available and the Chapter 6 concepts will be available later today.

Welcome to DNotes quadrifoglio!