I have voted a little bit, when I remembered to do so. I'm not one of those vote every hour on the hour sort of people, for any coin, though.

I think some MP voting contests could spur things along even more so, if any XBC whales feel like donating.

Nothing is going to be 100% anonymous. Nothing will necessarily be  NSA-proof, guaranteed, without a doubt, anonymity. As for current models, we have darksend, which will be open sourced by the way, so it's not like it'll be closed sourced by the time people use it. It's only closed sourced to avoid the issues we are seeing now... basically every cloner trying to make their own anon feature and failing at it. The other flavor is cryptonote, which I honestly don't know much about. And then there are simple mixers, which would fit your model of centralization.

It's a fad because Drk shot up, and people figured out they could lie about anon features and people wouldn't notice... at first. That's how all alt fads seem to start, whatever makes money for that month is the popular thing. I do think the ability to have anonymous transactions do add value to a coin, simply for the unique factor when compared to bitcoin. I'd say the same about things like Ethereum and MaidSafe.

I wonder if they are at that point now in regarding anonymity and false promises. I was surprised people fell for it the first time, with liberty, dream, bank, etc. I wonder if scammers will simply become more elaborate though -- incorporate a certain level of anonymity, a simple mixer, something, but work under the closed source model until completion. Basically become an evil version of Drk with nothing under the hood.

So far, the scams basically fell apart at the start, as they had nothing working at all. More complex scams could have just enough working to fool people.

I agree as to the launch... it went pretty much as well as anyone could have hoped for. It was the insane ex-dev that caused all the problems.

Although I also agree about not announcing stuff that may not see the light of day, or could fail, I do think the devs should announce stuff they are reasonably sure will get to completion. The price is still very iffy with basically no elbow room between bad, but workable prices and rock bottom.

And I feel bad for the mil coin investors. The numbers never made any sense in regard to them making profit, and that was without a fork and if the dev was halfway decent. It still beats me why polo decided to accept that coin for an ipo. They could have randomly chosen any new coin here on the ann board and probably have done better. The honorcoin thing is something I expect to see more of... it was spurred on by drk's success... why bother to even code real anonymity when you can simply lie about it?

One thing I noticed about Kingcoiny was that withdrawals did not require email verification ... a bit odd.

And yeah, I'd certainly be careful. I think for any new exchange to succeed they will have to be completely transparent, with the names of the exchange owners, state or country they work in and all of that stuff.

Forgot one last thing. Although I know the dev team seemingly is against it, and so are a number of people here in this thread, you may wish to consider the anonymity idea again.

If you have a unique way of implementing it, and can do so in a reasonable time frame, I'd suggest strongly considering it.

Dangling the anonymity carrot is one way to stabilize the price. But I should stress it needs to be a real carrot, not some far off, vague, or false promise like so many other devs have done lately.

As for other ways to keep the price stable, temporarily boosting the multipool prices may help. Yep, it's a short-term bandaid. But when you are bleeding away, anything at all can help. You just want to buy some time right now and get the coin at a decent floor. Even if that floor is below ipo levels, so long as it remains stable, you can work from there.

You can also try smaller exchanges ... swisscex, kingcoiny, austin global, etc. It's not much, but no harm in extra exchanges. And try to see if you can get polo to speed up their review process a bit.

Even if you don't want to pay for MP voting just yet, you may wish to use some funds to pay for voting contests/giveaways. They tend to spur on a coin's community a bit, and of course the extra bonus is more votes.

I'm not looking at it from the perspective of a MP pump. Notice I didn't say to vote the coin to the very top of the list ... you just want to get the coin some attention, get MP within sight and give people a reason to hold the coin.  People are less likely to dump at cheap prices if they know a payday is coming.

It would take weeks of voting, maybe a month or two, at the least, to move a coin from the top 10 to number 1, so it buys the team some time. That's all I am saying, you need some breathing room to do the things you guys have planned and keep the price stable. You guys did take in over 100 btc, using some on MP shouldn't really put a damper on any future plans... I mean, it should be plenty of coin to do both.

Perhaps MP won't be needed and I am wrong. I just have the feeling that you guys are working on a different timescale than investors will want ... they see an ever-falling price, promises of nice things in the future... and wait. Crypto people have such insanely short attention spans that a week of silence to them means the devs have vanished and a coin will die. It's just the way it is. And whenever a coin falls below ipo prices it should be a wake up call to the devs that they need to do something, and do it quickly.

So whatever you guys have planned, I suggest moving your time table up and get something out there as soon as you can.

I don't agree in regard to price. As price reflects the perception of the coin. If a coin sinks too low, the general perception will be of a dead coin ... yes, devs could then announce some incredible features, but then it only brings the coin up to a certain point. A point probably still below ipo prices.

And of course I agree about MP. It's something the devs should have done a day or two ago, when all the fud/trolling stuff started.

As stated, the problem was the lack of activity for the first month of the coin. There was basically no development, hence the cycle was basically... release coin... forget about coin... make temp website... then notice there is hardly any volume to the coin. It shouldn't be a surprise.

What I would suggest is:

Use the ipo funds to buy votes. Use the funds to buy dev work for mobile wallets.

And this may seem a bit radical, but at this point I don't know what there is to lose -- rebrand the coin entirely. Consider it a dead coin that a dev plans to revive.

The LiteCoinPlus name was always a bit silly to begin with. BitCoinPlus could get away with it, as at least a lot of the general public has heard of bitcoin. It's not like litecoin is doing so fantastic either, nor is bitcoinplus so popular that it even needed a sister coin. Although XBC has been going up lately, XLC has been moving down. Down so much that one of my insanely low buy orders just got hit last night, after I got out of this coin previously.

Anyway, I'd go for a rebranding and get on other exchanges via ipo funds, not volume or voting (won't happen otherwise) -- unless it's a dinky small exchange like the ones I mentioned, mostly just to use as a lifeboat in case bittrex drops the coin.

Although suggested many times, I'll suggest it again -- use ipo money to vote the coin into at least the top 5-10 on MP, ideally even higher. You don't have to vote it to the top, just enough where it has the number 1 spot in sight. It should hopefully stabilize the price and buy the team more time. If the price drops any further, forget whatever plans you guys have for the coin, whatever developments... it'll be considered a dead coin.

I had gotten out of the coin after all the hubbub started the other night, but see I am back in on a very low buy order that I never expected to get filled. Ideally this low order doesn't become the new high.

I think you mentioned earlier you may consider a cryptonote flavor? Make one with a gui wallet and it could be interesting.

I assume FREEB 2 is just a placeholder name, as obviously if the coin isn't distributed freely, it won't make sense. Nor did Freebiescoin as a name seem to help the original much.

Will there be any free coins given away to those who lost coins on sharex? I took a screenshot of my stuck coins in withdrawal, for instance.... basically because of my past experience with coinex. Or you can use the initial giveaway list as a basis for the new coin's free distribution? If it's a straight coin to coin buyout, you may run into an issue if the sharex guy makes multiple accounts and tries to convert his (or I should say, everyone else's) gazillion freebiecoins.

1) Okay, for the first question, you may not like the answer.

Anyway, my perception from the start was the coin was rather shady and simply trying to cash in on the anon craze, since Drk shot up like it did. You joined the ranks of DreamCoin and BankCoin making anon claims that simply couldn't be true. Your ann thread made it sound like zerocoin would be implemented in a timely manner, or was in fact already implemented.

Zerocoin doesn't exist. It never was shown to work, dropped by the original devs, and even if it was somehow made to work, it'd probably have some major issues. Any dev saying they are going to implement something like this must have known something about it. Either they were simply negligent,  or trying to cash in on hype.

All that said, the coin was in a position to make money off of that hype. Until you went the IE route, and then your days were clearly numbered. I don't know what took you so long, but he basically behaved like a salesman on amphetamines... it was sort of clear that perhaps he wasn't the best guy for the job longterm.


2) As for what you can do to improve... hmm...

Well being upfront and honest is a start. Personally I don't see the point to a simple mixer now, with so many other flavors of anon out there, with the cryptonote flavors and Drk. You probably are better off just waiting until the end of the summer and implementing darksend if you want it, for free -- assuming it is opensourced by then (I forget their schedule). Use the btc funds for other types of coin development instead.

I haven't kept track of things here, but does that mean we can keep our wallet offline yet still set up masternodes?

I just find it all completely bizarre, like I am watching the behavior of some species besides humans. So much in crypto defies logic. Then again, I guess that is how btc got the value it has now.

Personally Drk is one of those coins I mostly just hold and forget about... forget I even have it. I have 1K set aside for a node (have to find the time to set it up), and 200 spare coins. I might play with those extra 200, but am so terrible at guessing highs and lows, for now I am just holding them. If the coin shoots up a ton around RC3 time, I may sell some of the spares then try to rebuy back in lower.  Wish I did that with the previous high, but again, I'm not good at the 'sell high/buy back in low' game.

I chalk it up to crypto people being crazy. A release date gets pushed back a week for more testing, and it's a disaster. It's like Apple saying they will release a product a week later and then their stock crashes some insane amount  -- a whole lot doesn't make sense to me in cryptoland.

 I hope the dev never says something like he caught a cold, or people will have him on his deathbed, coin development ceased, and the end is nigh.

Mil was always a risky bet. I briefly considered it after they changed the proportional distribution, but after looking at the numbers, backed off. It would have had to done as good as or better than DCM, to make even a small profit, and that's with the new distribution. I didn't think polo hype could overcome that. And yeah, dumpers killed lcl too (although it was dying on its own to begin with)... it'd be nice if the Mil guy offered up a buy wall for those who invested, but expect he won't.

The way ipos have gone recently is setting a bad precedent though. Either it's an initial pump then dump below ipo prices, or in Mil's case, it doesn't look like it will reach ipo prices again. The only exception has been xbc, and perhaps simply because it was first using this model. And it's not exactly doing stellar lately either.

I have a feeling that the exchanges will run the ipo model into the ground if they keep up at this rate.

It's a 4 day old coin. I know people move fast in crypto-land, but... 4 days. I mean, what did you really expect it to have? It's not like it's lingered around for months and months.

What it does have is, a lot of ipo money. If the devs use it wisely, the coin should be on every major exchange, have whatever wallet additions people ask for, anon features (although they currently seem against it), marketing and all of that stuff. Of course that relies on the devs using the ipo money, hence why I said it'd be smart for them to buy votes, to show investors they will spend it.

Don't know if it'll slow the bleeding at all, but I do know polo was in the works for the coin. Unfortunately they didn't get it done on Sat, but assuming it gets there, the coin very well should get some sort of boost in price. Even if it gets just back to around ipo levels, it's something to work with.

The dev team may also wish to break out some of that ipo money, buy up the coin to ipo levels again, as a show of good faith. It may stabilize things a bit.

Well, I wouldn't assume the worst and compare to coins like that. And to their credit, the devs did post today, so it's not like they were completely absent. But to me, they weren't nearly active enough. They should have figured this was emergency mode, and broken out all of their tools/plans/ipo money and tried to fix the issue.

It also makes me think that all coins should have moderated forums. I am usually against it, as devs can be overzealous and delete real posts, but there is so much trolling and fud nowadays, it's almost a necessity. If I didn't know better, I'd say Bob was purposely lowering the price so his investors could get dirt cheap coins, he can back off, price goes back up to around ipo levels, and they cash in at double. That's usually the purpose of trolls... but in this case, I think it's a situation of just craziness prevailing.