Yeah, new users are really helpful, because they're usually on the fence about whether to come aboard or not. If an idea doesn't have appeal for them, then it's not a good idea. That's how I look at it.

I think finding a Christian merchant is putting the cart before the horse. It's extra work for the merchant, and the low price of the coin makes it difficult for them to count in millions of BBP (but the price is what it is.) If it were a stock, I'd recommend doing a reverse split just to get the price up into something people and merchants can wrap their heads around, or have some kind of  levels to the coin, like Byteball  does with Bytes, Megabyte and Gigabyte. Maybe that's not feasible or useful though.

People need a reason to use the coin as currency, or else it just becomes an investment thing. Rob mentioned putting videos up. If there were a way to organize them right, we could possibly sell a subscription service, where for certain amount of BBP per month, they have access to a searchable scripture, custom prayers, videos, etc. That's providing a service that could attract people.A more sophisticated addition could be a custom course in Christianity, so that people can wind their way through the material and feel accomplishment, and even get some kind of "diploma" and BBP as a result.

Another thing I've seen before is custom prayers, where someone could have a group of people pray for them or their loved ones, and charge for that service if possible. I've seen that kind of thing before, but not sure if it was free or for a fee.

I think one of the biggest issues is most people don't want to open an exchange account and trade for BBP if they're not already in crypto (which is the vast majority).  If there was some way to make that easier, I think the popularity might take off. It seems like almost all the coins have this issue.

The general idea is to provide something that people would want, and will give payment in BBP. Instead of asking people to use the coin, require it in exchange for something.

I'll have to sleep on it more. My best ideas come in dreams or prayer. I'm pretty good spitballing ideas, but implementation is not my strong suit.

Rob's quote at the end of your post is beautiful!

You have to clean the house, before inviting guests. IMO, there needs to be an effort internally to bring more cohesion to the project. Only those with power can bring this about.

Edit: clean house is not a reference to people.

ARM support will be very appreciated, seeing as the low energy use of the miner would fit perfectly.

thesnat21, thanks for the response. I agree it can be a vicious circle. I don't want to post there because the environment doesn't seem aligned with what I'd post. But if I don't post, then I can't help change the environment. I'll have to meditate on this more, maybe I need to be the change I want to see. For now, this thread feels more open to these kinds of discussion without concern for censorship based on a single person's perspective. The censorship for the perception of not being "positive" about the project does bug me, especially when the person doing the censoring often goes on the attack themselves?


Well, I think the word cult is too strong, and not exactly appropriate. It just seems with a lack of diversity, things kind of become a self-feeding closed loop. This has been my observation throughout life, not limited to BBP. When I read the main thread, it's mostly reports from "worker bees", what the main core of people are working on. But I'm having trouble piecing it all together into a cohesive whole.

I don't have any problem with Rob, and have a deep feeling of wanting to help him, to help the project (I do wish he'd chill out some). It's hard when you take the mantle of responsibility for something. It can lead to all kinds of control issues. Getting a project to thrive always means letting more people get involved, which means letting go to some extent. It's difficult, especially for IT folks, and when you personally care about the outcome. This is where surrender to God becomes very helpful, like "I don't want this project to succeed, without divine approval, and I can't know what that is ahead of time." That's how I see it.

I thought about that "gap" more. What I see is, as you said, is an intense concentration of posts by the core folks, and then what feels like a moat before it gets to people like me. It kind of feels like being on the outside. You need the core for functioning, but you also need a bigger involvement to grow.  It's vital to a project's (any project's) health to bring in new people. Being on the "inside" all the time, it's too easy to forget one's "beginner mind". It will actually be impossible to retain this being very involved in the project, which is why it's vital to always have newbies, and not deride them for needing "hand-holding". It's hard to account for how damaging that is, or how many people just walk away after getting the feeling of not being honored and wanted.

I'm still new enough to have that kind of mind, and that's what I bring to each of the projects I'm involved with. If I can't succinctly explain what a project is to my parents, or someone at the supermarket without the jargon like PoBH and such, that's a sign that it's going to be hard to grow without more focus. I do writing on the side, and it's important to have an "elevator pitch", a 20 second explanation for the endeavor. I would say for BBP, it should just be the fundamental hope to bring genuine Christian values to cryptocurrency. It doesn't matter if it's orphans or widows, that's not the heart of it. It's the hope. I think that gets obscured somewhat. (see comment about use cases at bottom).

Personally, I think the Dash model doesn't help. It seems to me to be very non-democratic, and difficult to interface with the project's values as I seem them. But I realize that's already set in stone. Some other projects don't have such formal duties, and when it's time for an exchange, it's just asked that people donate crypto when interested in a new exchange. It seems more inclusive and free-flowing, and community-driven. And if people don't want to fund it, then it doesn't happen. Nobody takes ultimate responsibility. Here, it seems very formal (maybe the project's size needs that?), and like BBP is employment for some. I just can't wrap my mind around things like IT and marketing budgets. They're needed, but on a continual basis every month? It's as if BBP is an employment opportunity, which I think looks odd from the outside--the haves and have-nots. The expenses always seem tied to the same few people always spinning off new ideas that cost bbp to implement. Sure, Rob says step up if you want to be involved, but frankly it's not a very open environment at present and I question to what degree he means that. And I'm not sure the core group will allow the space for that to happen, which can really hamper long-term growth. A project this size should have at least a dozen people cranking out code, which would allow for more volunteer opportunities and lessen the "budget".

Thanks for your feedback and attention. I wouldn't put this much thought into it if I didn't see a lot of promise for this coin.

Edit: One thing I think BBP is missing is use cases for the coin. It kind of functions as a currency for the core group, but why would your average Joe or Jane Smith use the coin, other than as an investment? It kind of seems like the coin's use, outside the core group, is lost. This is a big problem for a lot of crypto, but really apparent here.

Friend, if you're looking for a place free of naysayers, I'm afriad you'll have to leave the planet. They will always be there. You can either ignore them, or look at it impersonally and try and find something constructive in the criticism. You'll make yourself miserable if you keep count. And none of us want to see that.

I wandered over to the official forum, but the activity level seems pretty low, and I couldn't find a place for a high-level philosophical discussion there. I honestly think more people read the threads over here.

I also wanted to get your input on a couple of questions. Why isn't there more community involvement with this coin? I notice it seems like a small number of people are responsible for the vast majority of the posts, which are very technically detailed, and I'm not sure who the audience most of you are speaking to. It would take me a lot of time to figure out what everyone's talking about, so most of it just sails over my head. Maybe others feel the same way? This is by far the most demanding project to try and understand.

Shouldn't there be more diverse activity for a 500+ page thread? If so, what do you think we can do to improve that? I'm not sure how to contribute on the main ANN thread. It feels like there's no room there.

The second question is my biggest concern, which is the extremely low volume. How can we improve this? It seems like on a lot of projects I follow, people gravitate towards getting lsited on more exchanges as the solution. But does that really bring investors in, as a case of "if you build it, they will come" (which I don't think works). Of course the overall bear market doesn't help. Still, it feels like there's a gap somewhere, but I can't put my finger on it..

Sorry for continuing this thread, but it still feels relevant as a community discussion.

I noticed a page on the WAVI devs site that mentions YENTEN. Not sure if that's evidence, but it did some a little odd.

https://wavidev-the-man.github.io/wavi/index3.html

Can't tell if responses are serious?  

If so, let me provide some assistance https://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=howey+test.

Someone is going to say "Cool the Supreme Court approves, I'm in!"

Thanks for your response.

Agree with most of what you wrote. Personal information is just that, true. And there is more than one coin out there that has pseudonyms and anonymity. So it's nothing uncommon. I can't imagine going around to churches and giving everyone a pseudonym. Then again, my real name isn't secoccular. ;p


I still think the discussion is better somewhere here on bct, just for more visibility. But I understand what you're saying, and I don't have much more to add to this thread.

I'm looking at/ involved with over a dozen projects right now. and wouldn't want to join a separate outside forum for each of them. Discord is a little easier because it's all in one place. But I'll go check out the BBP forum again and see the activity levels. Maybe it is better to keep the moaning over there. I don't know.

I'm happy to see the community coming together more. Having forum managers creates an important buffer, and makes it easier on Rob and us plebes. In my experience of *cough* years in IT, the most brilliant programmers weren't really hard-wired for some kinds of communication. The ones that did the best had some folks in from of them, so they could focus on the coding.

In total agreement with your comments about complexity. Using more common terms would be a huge help for newcomers. PoW is just PoW, as you say.

As to the monarch coin (asked above), like all slang terms, it arose spontaneously, without a set definition from the "Satoshi Fan Club". But I would say it's a coin where there's basically one person at the head, who codes, makes changes to the structure (like the widow thing), owns a large number of nodes, and really has final decision. Whether that applies to BBP, I don't know.

Again, I'm really happy with the new moderation on the ANN thread. It feels like a positive direction.

Depends on where you look.

https://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=12603&sort_style=&start=120

Check his post history. Seems to be a habit for ths person.



And thanks for you reply to my post above. It's a little disappointing the issue of MN control by the lead dev is going to just hang there without an answer. Maybe my expectations are out of line, but some other projects I'm involved with have 100% transparency (and those are secular projects). It's strange to have these pockets of hidden information, but it is what it is.

I learned a new term the other day -- monarch coin. Do you think it applies.

I completely see that Rob is heavily invested in this project, and....surprise... I want it to succeed too, and am trying to point out things that could really derail it. Maybe my focus is wrong.

Why should this discussion happen on the main thread? The ANN thread is where we get reports from the dev and team, as well as some light troubleshooting. It seems appropriate to have a separate thread like this, where we can look into the mirror a bit. It seems cleaner to me to have some separation.

Which brings me to a point about separation. It's really necessary, especially in business. We have to see ourselves as investors, project members, charity givers, Christians, etc. etc. Of course we're all these things, but it's good to have boundaries. When we get overly identified with one aspect, the others suffer.

One more thought. Years ago, I learned a Chinese expression "running a country is like frying a fish". For years I could not figure out the meaning. It wasn't until I actually fried a fish that the meaning became clear. If you fry a fish, you can only turn it once or twice before the fish dis-integrates.

I feel our fishes are, technically, suffering from over-turning. Currently I am completely unable to promote the coin, because I have no idea what the direction is--orphans, widows, file hosting, etc.  In the short while I've been here, the future of the project seems to be spinning more and more into complexity. We use terms like POBH or whatever the Orphan Proof is called. Do we realize those terms mean not a lot outside of our little group? It creates a barrier of entry, where new members are forced to learn a new vocabulary that doesn't apply anywhere outside of the project. I almost looked past this one because it involved a lot more learning on my part to figure out all the terminology, so it took more of an "investment" to even understand BBP.

Has anyone considered making a glossary type document that defines what all these terms are? It would be easier on new folks like me to be able to enter the world of BBP knowing all the definitions, instead of having to hang out on the main thread for a while to pick up the pieces intuitively. Thanks for reading.

Even though things have gotten personal with the sleights and insults, one thing appears to me. That we are a community, and some of what has been brought up really needs to come to light, for the community about how things are being handled. They affect us all. Let's have a non-censored discussion.

It's actually in the best interest of everyone. Let everyone hear. If you all want to argue about whether so-and-so is acting Christian enough, then PMs are the way to go. But for community-wide issues, like how proposals work behind the scenes and potential conflicts of interest.  How can we say that only affects one person who needs to work it out in private? I don't want to make any comparisons to political parties who employ that tactic. Let's just say it tends to end badly for all. I'm really hoping that doesn't happen here.

Do I, as the owner of a tiny amount of biblepay, have the right to understand the proposal process?
Is it true anyone can just "reboot" their proposal until it passes (those with the most votes can take full advantage of this?
Can proposals really be hidden, and who has the decision on that?
How many nodes does the lead dev have?

These are examples of questions that arise because information only comes out piecemeal, maybe leaked from private conversations and messages. I don't want to see this sad trend continue, so let's get things out in the light, maybe then it's easier to trust again?   The problem with "let's just start over", is the questions that spawned the controversy are left unadressed. so the release of tension is only temporary. Then the cycle starts again, maybe with something new added to the fire. We can fix this, but we have to make some new patterns.

Edit: spelling.

May I suggest part of the voting process is a check so copyrighted material doesn't live on this blockchain? With the long-life that IPFS provides, hitting this checkbox might be important.

It's a new coin, only one pool and CPU only at this point. Someone has access to a lot of hashpower and is flexing that muscle on solo mining. As more people come aboard the pool, it will win more blocks.

I think that is a good idea. The Sparc website does the same thing. You put in the CPID, a yellow checkmark appears, and then goes green when approved, or turns into a red X if there's a problem. It works really well because it let's you see the process. Even if it's yellow for a few days, at least you know it's still in progress. Makes waiting easier.


They also have a demo mode, to show the process to a prospective cruncher.

http://demo.sparc.network/

Send Wolfie a DM. He'll need your IP.

Not sure I understand your point. BTC is going to consume as much energy as it does. BLE is just using its block time for the metronome. BLE doesn't contribute to the hashpower of BTC, it's not "powered" by BTC. I understand if you have a political stance against bitcoin, but I still think it's a big energy savings with Bitcoin Low Energy.

I would modify your analogy as, "my neighbor has a huge Hummer vehicle, and every day he drives it, I choose to ride my bicycle and save on the gas. I'm not "powered" by my neighbor's driving habits, I'm just using it as a point of reference for my own energy savings.

BLE.JeKhoAHxad89JYUjU5MqjGaToS5UevJYTm

What's in the future?

For now, the coin is mined by CPU, which keeps in Satoshi's vision of 1 CPU = 1 vote.

Will there be a GPU miner created? It's inevitable, but not currently available. It may be that when someone develops a GPU miner, they will have some fun mining before releasing it to everyone. It will be interesting to see if we'll notice the change in network hash rates as a result.

Will there be ASICs for BLE? It's certainly possible for someone to write code to allow ASIC mining. However, I am doubtful that BLE ASICS will be a big thing. Why? Because ASICs are meant to be the marathon runners. They're made to work hard 24/7. Mining a coin that is mostly idle in cycles doesn't sound like the best utilization for ASIC. I just can't imagine big ASIC farms dedicating resources towards this project. Maybe that's just a hope on my part.

BLE.JeKhoAHxad89JYUjU5MqjGaToS5UevJYTm

I like the analogy. Here's another one:

Mining is a race. In btc it's a long race, ,many times around the track. People can do all sorts of things to improve their run times (hash power), and the requirements are getting ever larger. It's almost like an arms race.

btcLE says, wait a minute. Why do we have to run at full speed all the time? We only need the race to be fair, not marathon-length.

So btcLE says, how about if on each lap that these btc marathon racers take, we just sprint the first 100 yards of it. If we all do that, it's still a fair competition, and it saves us a bunch of energy cost.

There's lots of ways to look at it.

BLE.JeKhoAHxad89JYUjU5MqjGaToS5UevJYTm

I'm in no rush to see it on exchanges. Maybe when this thread hits 50 pages or more?