After some research apparently this is bitcoind?  I remembered I had a error message pop up during the beta install which may have caused bitcoind to not run properly.

Anyways I just did what I did when I had a similar issue last week, reinstalled the non beta edition and now everything is working fine. Coins are now showing as confirmed on both ends, thanks for the help.

quite a lot to it, going through it looks like this is where Im getting an error when I try to send after updating to the beta edition

2017-06-07 10:21:52 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:3099 - Sending Tx, 7fc06e76fa56988078b52575391fb98472fbdcd6796567399df6728d739f9d36
2017-06-07 10:21:58 (ERROR) -- Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ui\QtExecuteSignal.pyc", line 31, in methodSlot
  File "ArmoryQt.py", line 5036, in handleCppNotification
  File "ArmoryQt.py", line 3114, in zcBroadcastError
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 3012, in broadcastThroughRPC
DbErrorMsg: <CppBlockUtils.DbErrorMsg; proxy of <Swig Object of type 'DbErrorMsg *' at 0x000000000375CF30> >

Let me know if you need more info, I can post all of today but it's a ton of text.

Just loaded it, clicked send with a higher fee this time and nothing happened after the passphrase window closed. Armory behaving as if I never tried to send any BTC, never had this happen before and it's kinda scary...

It showed as the only transaction, no returning change.

I cleared unconfirmed and am trying again but now getting the "tx timeout" error, guessing I need to rebuild and rescan now?

Clicked send max, reading now there is a potential bug where Armory puts too small a fee when using the Max button?

Can I just clear unconfirmed and try again or am I risking a double spend and more issues?

Thanks for the quick reply.

I don't see any further replies on this issue.  I just had the same comment on my transaction and it's still showing unconfirmed after 12 hours when the previous transaction only took about 1 hour.  Do I need to do anything to have this transaction work or do I just wait for it to confirm>

Thanks. 

How is it not safe to say this is a bad idea?  Other than if you're biased and have a personal relationship with those who own the company pitching it that is.

Any attempt at blacklisting coins in circulation is a horrible idea, regardless of whether it's a private institution or government doing the listing, regardless of whether it'll hurt privacy or not.   There are potentially millions of BTC that have been used in a questionable transaction during their life that have exchanged hands multiple times and are now possibly in your very bank if you've ever used an exchange. 

Can we get an at least symbolic vote of "no confidence" in the bitcoin foundation to show the community does not agree with this horrible suggestion?

This makes me sick to my stomach, and fearful for Bitcoin's ability to survive long term.

Let's just remove every dollar that's ever been used for illegal activities from circulation, what's the worst that can happen? /s

I spent a month following this section of the forum, in that time made about 30% more BTC than I would of just mining them straight.   Even with that profit increase, I decided last week it was not worth the time/effort since I only run 2 cards instead of a large rig.    Way too much worthless BS is posted here to wade through unless you spend the majority of your free time on it which to me isn't worth it.

Alts have jumped the shark imo, way too much market saturation in a market that's sole purpose is to keep gpu miners in business.   Once the speculators figure this out, you'll see the "death" of the alt coin.   Until some actual innovation comes out, I see no reason to think any of these coins(LTC included) can ever coexist successfully with Bitcoin let alone challenge it.

another failed hazardcoin for your weekend enjoyment!

Funniest part is just like feathercoin2/firecoin, and weedcoin, people will actually mine this!  Im sure hazard is loving it.

You can't use "it worked for bitcoin" when discussing litecoin because the market landscape in those scenarios is completely different.  Bitcoin was pioneering a trail, things that worked for it won't always work for litecoin which has to compete with what is now a vastly oversaturated crypto market.

This argument would hold water if BTC had to compete with other established cryptos in it's early days.

Just because it worked for bitcoin, doesn't guarantee litecoin can repeat when the market landscape is completely different.

ding ding ding

Miners only are making a profit if they are turning their alts into BTC, aka dumping.  The amount of dumping of every alt exceeds the amount of speculators/investors willing to buy every day, which according to simple economics means prices will continue to plummet until the coin dies due to miner inactivity. 

This isn't news to most miners, which is why they continue to dump further exacerbating the issue.  Unfortunately every coin has bagholders who will try and buy at the "great low prices" the "stupid miners" keep selling at, until they eventually give up and cash out as well.

Can any of these alts buck the trend?  Only DGC and WDC right now seem to have a shot at it with their respective community's support, but that still might not be enough to overcome the daily dumping.

Sorry a small handful of online retailers does not a useful currency make.

I know there are plenty of proponents(early adopters) for LTC on this board, but as someone who took a break following crypto during it's inception and came back later I really don't see what's innovative about it at all from a non "miner profit" based perspective.

It's asic proof, great so asic miners will never care about it.  It's "faster" than bitcoin, but not fast enough to make a big difference especially compared to the nearly instant speed of the recent alt clones.  It's main saving grace is it was one of the first scrypt coins so it was adopted by tons of GPU miners looking to avoid the upcoming ASIC mining wave in Bitcoins.  I just don't see that being enough to keep it afloat when every day new scrypt coins come out that offer improvements, especially when it doesn't have the name recognition and community/retailer support of Bitcoin.

thought OP was legit until I saw no franko folder

 

I assume the OP wants more people to post to show their support, that's what he's asking for in the first post to reveal more info on the coin.

support shown, lets do this   

So is porncoin the one for those who are too dirty for sexcoin, which launched yesterday?

Ah5993Kj8U94kzQpcfGQRLMrmVEnH9GwEr

thanks!