That's why I voted for making Mooncoin more secure over and over again. But Mooncoin Foundation and some others blocked that - for example my suggestion of making MOON a PoS/PoW-hybrid coin or implementing another - more complex algo or technology - making it a little harder to attack Mooncoin, instead of spending development-power on MoonWord, SmartLikes and other relatively uninteresting things. If these really were interesting for the cryptoworld, the price would be much, much higher already - because as an investor you know an important rule: buy the rumor, sell the fact. Now we have the mess by setting wrong priorities.

I repeat it once again: If the basics of a coin don't work, then the rest is pointless.

@agswinner: I have been absent for a longer time for good reason. Part of it was to see, whether what I thought and warned you of, will come true. And it came true. Mooncoin was attacked and again some of the Mooncoin-people now are trying to draw the wrong conclusions (i.e "burning" coins).

As for the government trying to overtake: I did not mean a government like that of the U.S., but the government of the some here always trying to sell some peoples opinions as the truth and the "decision of the community".
Maybe you have not read the excerpt in full or did not understand it completely: the most important conclusion from that excerpt is, to not censor coins, because it undermines trust in a currency. As sad as it is, that these coins eventually will come to the market again and that previous owners don't want to buy their own coins again, when they are correctly handed to the authorities, as good it is to show the cryptoworld, that Mooncoin has corrected the mistake it made.

There were others here before, who described this as a big problem. But they were ignored.
And now everyone complains about Mooncoin "not taking off" and cries for "burning the coins" to make it go to the moon. Again a wrong path, which will make it even worse.

Btw: there are many others, that may not even post here, but are also part of "the community".


edit:

Here the link to the mentioned excerpt again: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

...and the text from there:
"Prevent any transactions spending "stolen" coins, effectively destroying those coins. If the coins clearly are stolen, then there is a risk that this action will be accepted by the Bitcoin community, but this would set a very damaging precedent. If it becomes possible for coins to be blacklisted in this way, then it is a slippery slope toward blacklisting of other "suspicious" coins."

Just because some here in the thread and/or in closed communication would like to lower the payout, does not make it a community-backed decision. As allsnioc posted, this would need a real vote. So it is perfectly ok, saying it was altered by "some". Other "somes" may not even have been asked or don't follow the channels - at least not regularly. So it may be backed by a part of "the community", but it is certainly no democratic decision.

Anyway, the dev who coded this (barrysty1e) is gone now and in the light of this, those kind of changes in the code could be perceived by knowledgable investors as short-sighted hectic and desperate tries to drive the price up. This is not desirable for a serious, classic coin. If it was, then LTC or BTC would need to change their code immediately regarding the payouts, because this would drive the price for them, too.

deaconboogie set the coin up as Mooncoin, so he does not necessarily be a mathematics guru. But he chose the payout-scheme nicely in coherence to the name and the theme of this coin. So why would one alter that, if it means absolutely NO difference, whether 29531 MOON or 16000-something or even 10000 are paid out to the miners? With the amount of MOON already in circulation, this change really makes absolutely no difference. Regarding the Mooncoin lunar landing: Because it is Mooncoin, it makes sense. At least it is better marketing, than trying to "lock" coins by code, which is non-effective by design and furthermore creates censorship - see here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power - excerpt:

"Probably the most likely scenario where this attack would be employed would be for a government to try to get control over Bitcoin by acquiring a majority of hashing power (either directly or by enforcing rules on private miners within its borders). Then this government could use the transaction-censorship power listed above to do things like:

    Prevent any transactions spending "stolen" coins, effectively destroying those coins. If the coins clearly are stolen, then there is a risk that this action will be accepted by the Bitcoin community, but this would set a very damaging precedent. If it becomes possible for coins to be blacklisted in this way, then it is a slippery slope toward blacklisting of other "suspicious" coins.
    Prevent all transactions from unknown people, so everyone has to register with the government in order to transact."

So trying to force Vassilis to "burn" the coins, he has received on his address, is exactly the same kind of the above methods. It will attract short-sighted investors (or better: speculators), that want the quick buck and they will keep coming back complaining, if the hot air of that measure - if any - is out of the coin again.

Mooncoin needs a stable and serious development, ironing-out of bugs and strong and friendly support of normal investors by a competent dev, as well as strong efforts to get it listed on further, bigger exchanges. Not a new soldier-of-fortune-feature or short-sighted-speculator-candy every day or week. That's all what it takes. If Mooncoin has achieved this, one could think about new features, if necessary. But first of all, serious investors need stability, honesty and a proven record of development. Everyone can write a white paper or a "roadmap", but developing a stable coin that becomes a "classic" or a "no-brainer" to invest in, needs much more than changing the block-reward or burning coins. Why not burn every coin except of 43, to become the brother of 42-coin? Why not do a swap and set the deadline to next week, so that the result is, that all earlier holders of MOON are out of the game? They would recognize months later, when they look again at their wallet, that their coins are useless then.

I hope you see, that all this is not the solution, but creates new problems that do not really help Mooncoin, but only makes a nice flash-in-the pan for pump-and-dumpers.

The next price rise will come. That's the character of (stock) markets. Patience is the key.

Warren Buffett:
"The stock market is a wonderfully efficient mechanism for transferring wealth from the impatient to the patient."

http://www.azquotes.com/quote/877076


Edit:
Maybe also interesting to read in that regard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_cycles

From there:
"Well known cycles include:

    The lunar cycle
    Annual seasonality, also known as Sell in May or the Halloween indicator. As well as the January effect and July effect.
    The four-year United States presidential election cycle in the US.
    The 17.6 Year Stock Market Cycle
    The 60 year Kondratiev cycles"

See the line in bold. That's why it is sad, that the block-reward for Mooncoin-miners has been altered by some here from the lunar cycle-based 29531 MOON ( see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase ) to some other (decreasing) payout scheme.

From the original Mooncoin-ann-thread:

"Block rewards:

Blocks 1-100,000: 0-2,000,000 MOON
Blocks 100,001-200,000: 0-1,000,000 MOON
Blocks 200,001-250,000: 0-600,000 MOON
Blocks 250,001-300,000: 0-350,000 MOON
Blocks 300,001-350,000: 0-175,000 MOON
Blocks 350,001-375,000: 0-100,000 MOON
Blocks 375,001-384,400: 0-50,000 MOON

All future blocks are a fixed 29531 MOON."

There was no real need to alter that.

Alternatively you could add the nodes as a list to a config-file in the Mooncoin-directory (edit: it should be in a subfolder of your username directory, just search for it, should be ..\username\AppData\Roaming\Mooncoin).
Open a text-editor, name the new file mooncoin.conf and simply copy&paste the list from the above link into that file. Save it. Then restart the wallet. The wallet should find some working nodes and connect.

Here's another list of addnodes: https://novaexchange.com/addnodes/MOON/

It has to be added to the path to your mooncoin-wallet.exe when you start it up. So depending on where you saved/installed that file, it would look like so: c:\path\to\mooncoin\mooncoin.exe -zapwallettxes

You can change the properties of a desktop-shortcut by right-clicking and adding the option to the shown path and then click on the shortcut. It would start with that setting then. Remember to set it back to original, to prevent using that setting every time the wallet starts.

Have you tried adding nodes manually to get more connections? That could help, to get the tx propagated to the network.
See here on the left side of the page: https://www.coinexchange.io/network/peers/MOON

Then open the console and add some nodes one by one via (for example)

What's the version of your wallet? Check, if you use the latest one: https://github.com/mooncoincore/wallet/releases
You could also try restarting your wallet with -zapwallettxes added to the path (don't forget to remove that for the next startup then). This will "reset" all unsent transactions and your coins should reappear in the wallet's balance.

It's still alive after all the years.
The concept of masternodes could get in conflict with Mooncoins philosophy of decentralization.

That's why the coins should not have been tried to be "locked" in the first place anyway by wallet-code. From this only problems arise, as we see now. Anyone with only a little bit of technical knowledge knew, that it was only a matter of time (i.e.: price), when it would be profitable to start a 51%-attack to transfer the coins. The thief or one on his behalf would only need to rent enough hashpower and mine for a certain time with wallet-code, that has the limitations removed, until the coins were transferred and the transactions confirmed.

As said, the only real solution is to hand the stolen coins to the authorities, in order to end that chapter officially and with no possible harm for Vassilis afterwards, which would result from "burning" the coins.

If the coins are given to the authorities by him, no one can say, Vassilis "deals with stolen coins". That's why this is the only real solution.
As for barrysty1e: you should ask him, why he is such an eccentric, short sighted person (btw.: where did you get the information, that he dumped all his coins? Just curious ...).

Burning coins will erase credibility of Mooncoin.
An airdrop would attract attention, but decrease value, because anyone would ask, why does a serious old-school coin do such a promotion?
And if all of those airdropped coins are placed on the exchanges immediately, the price will drop more than ever.

To all of you this question: why did you invest in Mooncoin in the first place, if you do not accept the specs of the coin?

Is there any reason why some here are looking for how to construct a burning address?

Just re-read the posts of allsnioc, he has asked all the relevant questions to be asked - and that leads to only one solution.

Hence I repeat what I said some weeks ago: the only solution can be to hand over the stolen coins to the relevant authorities of Vassilis' jurisdiction. Plain and simple. They are the only ones to handle this case correctly. If that means the coins are sold in an auction later on, then be it like so. But then no one has to bother any longer with this and Mooncoin can return to normal.

The reductions will not change anything. As I said, I have never understood, why anyone wanted to lower the reward at all.

This is from the old ann-thread:

---
Details:

Algorithm: scrypt
Max coins: 384,400,000,000 MOON (yes, billion!)
Block time: 90 Seconds
Difficulty re-target time: 8 hours
Pre-mining: Absolutely none!

Block rewards:

Blocks 1-100,000: 0-2,000,000 MOON
Blocks 100,001-200,000: 0-1,000,000 MOON
Blocks 200,001-250,000: 0-600,000 MOON
Blocks 250,001-300,000: 0-350,000 MOON
Blocks 300,001-350,000: 0-175,000 MOON
Blocks 350,001-375,000: 0-100,000 MOON
Blocks 375,001-384,400: 0-50,000 MOON

All future blocks are a fixed 29531 MOON.

Specials:

    On July 21st, 2014 it will be the 45th anniversary of the lunar landing by the Apollo 11 astronauts. On this date, Mooncoin will begin to release one MOON for every USD spent on the Apollo space program at an accelerated rate: 25.4 billion!
    Every block number based on the lunar cycle will be awarded a 2x payout bonus!
    Other specials will come in future releases. We're open to suggestions!

---

They were carefully chosen and would be great still. If 29531 or 17000 or 10000 MOON per block are rewarded, does not play a real role.

Mooncoin is Mooncoin and all here have to accept, that it has a large supply and be OK with it. It is a coin conceived for the long run and less for the get-rich-quick-type of folks. Even if they could profit big in the last days after the big rallye up to 2000% plus in Dollars (seen over the last weeks).

I really recommend all here to stay realistic. Where else can you get a profit of this size? Not in traditional markets.
Not enough people invested in the rallye? Hey man, up to a few million volume is a good thing - at least for Mooncoin. Now ALL markets are down and are slightly recovering and so does MOON. The volume will go up again. The crytocurrency-market is only at its beginning - or how many of your friends and family do you know, that own cryptos already?

I'd like to answer this post with some different information.

First of all, we all should be happy, that MOON is back in Satoshi-land and it looks, that it stabilizes there. After that phenomenal rise it is unrealistic, to speak of that it could have reached 15-20 sats. It was time for a strong correction, especially, if all other coins, including BTC encounter a sharp decline, too. Why should MOON be an exception (even if it was nice, of course, but one has to stay realistic). Maybe the uncertain situation of the funds send to Vassilis have sped that up, but if you look at how many Mooncoins are already outstanding, there could not have been too many of those "panic-sells".

All this is a sign, that Mooncoin is a stable and long-term-oriented currency, which, by the way, is exactly what the fundamentals of Mooncoin are. And a large supply is not the problem, it is the assurance in the future, that this stability will go on and on.
It is a nice thing for a currency and especially long-term-investors.

So I'll repeat, what I said: Even if the Cryptsy-funds are getting into circulation one day (maybe via an auction of the authorities or the receiver), it will be of no big harm for Mooncoin; maybe for a short time it will lower the price, but as we have seen in the past, every price-retracement made MOON stronger, because more and more people get in cheap. And that is, what many people think: Buying BTC? WAAAYYY too expensive. Let's buy other coins, that are much cheaper still and see what happens - maybe the same like with BTC. This is what will make Mooncoin successful in the long run: Stability and speed of transaction. Not to mention one of the best names in cryptocurrency-world.

I'll also repeat, that the best is, to hand the coins over to the authorities, because there do not need to be seperate "crypto-laws" for this and never will be. If it were like that, Cryptsy would not have been regulated by a receiver. The coins were stolen and the one who has access to them, is bound to give them to the appropriate authority or even the receiver itself. If he does not, then think what happens, if one person reports to the receiver, that the coins of Cryptsy are available again and who has them. The receiver might file a claim against the authorities of the European country, where Vassilis is living, to hand over the coins and/or report him to the police, who could investigate and finally demand extradition to the US. Remember: this is not a value of some bucks, but worth several million US$.

Could you please explain, why you are posting here at all?
The specs of MOON are clearly stated all over the web. Only check coinmarketcap.

If you don't like coins with a supply as high as Mooncoin has, simply don't invest, but keep from posting such a nonsense here.
I assume, you also don't recommend DOGE, RDD or other large supply-coins to your friends, right? So go to their forums and post that jabberwocky. Maybe don't even invest in BTC, as all the stolen bitcoins have and will also be floating around.

They are talking about txes that were made during the time when the low-tx-fees were stuck.

Vassilis, could you contact coinexchange.io, in order to help solving the problem, they seem to have? It looks bad for Mooncoin, if an exchange does not communicate properly with its users, who obviously suffer from that problem, the wallet gave. That can happen, but should be handled correctly afterwards by the exchange. Maybe they will react better, if you as the developer get to them.

The volume is not really linked to the use of a coin. Volume is only what happens on exchanges. USE is, what happens in real life. So volume is good, but even if a coin has a high volume on exchanges, that really does not mean, that it is used in real life.

Mooncoin has an ever growing volume. Now a little lower than in the past days of course, but that is pretty normal, since the trading is growing in waves. So for many people it is the ideal time to buy into Mooncoin now, since most other people only buy when it is near its alltime high and then are losing, because buying high and selling low is the worst you can do.

Seems to be the classical chicken-and-egg-problem.
They will add Mooncoin later, if the volume is right.  

Now MOON seems to have reached its new bottom in Satoshi-land - after nearly all digital currencies were retracing in the last days - and hopefully it resumes its stable uptrend. It's good for MOON - just as for every asset - to have phases of correction. That stabilizes the price and makes the uptrend sustainable. No one needs pump and dump. MOON had a staggering ~300% gain in the last days and more than ~2000% over the last months, so a little break is nothing bad at this time. If some people take their profit, selling their coins to new Mooncoin-investors, that is not wrong.

What would you do? Running around and tear your hair?
So yes, staying cool is the best thing we all can do. You can't change what happened.

You can always demand "someone does something about this". How about you promoting Mooncoin to your family, friends etc.? Giving away MOON for free? It's what long-time members of the community are already doing for a long time.
Mooncoin was conceived with its supply as is. If you don't like it, don't invest in Mooncoin. It's as simple as that.

As agswinner earlier always said: "the use creates value". And as the use of Mooncoin is raising day by day, we all should not worry too much. Sure it would be not good for the market, if ALL of those ~63 bln MOON were dropped at once. But come on, not even the dumbest of dumb ones would do that.

As you know, BTC was not always "the" market, I was talking about the beginning. It had everything up to a price-drop of 90%. And still it faces drops of up to 40% today. On "traditional markets" this would be a disaster.

Look what happened to DOGE, which has a similar supply of coins and not one coin locked/frozen and with additional unlimited supply. Simply be patient, optimistic, use MOON and promote it where you can. Then it should go the same way as DOGE. Look at RDD.
Btw.: Both of the aforementioned coins were marked "coin of the week/day" by McAfee, for whatever that means.  
And with non-frozen supply.

I assume it was "getrawmempool true", right? Because it turns on verbose mode of that command.
If your transaction is not listed in either way, it was already successfully processed or cleared from the mempool, returning the coins to the sender's address.

It depends on if you were the sender or the receiver. If you were the sender, the exchange should have received the amount, if you did not cancel with -zapwallettxes before the tx was processed. In the latter case, the coins should have reappeared in your wallet.

If you were the receiver, the exchange should recredit them to your account, so you can send them again, if they did -zapwallettxes on their side and the coins were cleared from the mempool, before the tx was confirmed, which would mean that the coins arrived at your address. If they did not send them at all in the first place, they should also recredit those coins, of course.

Were you the sender or receiver?

I have just checked the mempool. Does not seem, that there are any of those stucked transactions still in. Only the normal ones, that are waiting to be confirmed. You can look for yourself. Open the console in your wallet and input the command getrawmempool just after a block has been found ( see: https://bchain.info/MOON/ for example). The getrawmempool shows ALL txes in the mempool, even stuck ones, which are omitted on bchains "unconfirmed-list". If there is no tx, the problem is on the exchange's side. Probably they have to clean their database from those old unsent/unconfirmed transactions, until the coins reappear in your account. But if they must do it manually, maybe they delay that, because it could be a time consuming, tedious work. They should not, of course, since it is the money of their customers.