Sr. Machado, thanks for debunking the myth of pemine one again and in all detail. Some people never needed any proof that Quark is a scam and I guess even after debunking the myth they will still stick to the conspiracy.  However,  for newcomers this is a good introduction.

Cryptohunter, take into account that weather is lovely and people are on holidays. I know this is the case for many xore Quarkers. I am writing this from a hotel bed after a friends wedding party .

We contscted Max after these discussions and will get him in touch with the community soon. I am positive about this happen pretty soon so let's wait for his perspective on things.

Was probably dragged into the spam stream

No, but we need a structure in my opinion to enhance decision taking by making it more transparent and democratical. We try to prepare the new forum, so this can be done all from within the forum and I hope others will get along with these ideas.

Hopefully that´s also the case for the renewed Foundation.

Lol, why am I not surprised that your "sources" in fact are no proof for your claims (btw. I know both threads, I even know your senseless posts). Here is a good read for you. And now excuse me, I need to ignore you.

What about connecting to other community members instead of posting dubious compuled wallets? I don´t know you. I don´t know anyone who knows you. You have no reputation. I would never install software by such a person, nor would I advise anyone to do so. Ifyou are seriously trying to help, then you better connect to other users. If you don´t I will rather warn others to use your ressources.

Provide a source.


Provide a source.

Who are you, a 5th grader? You aren´t even aware that using %s doesn´t work with infinite distributions and your numbers would be wrong even if it wouldn´t be infinite. Lol.



Provide a source.


Lol what would happen if Satoshi would sell-off, or large NXT holders, or large holders of basically every existing Altcoin. You are not aware that distribution in Altcoin is the reason why this is called a speculative market with exchange rates constantly jumping up and down - funny. How long have you been around? Distribution IS a problem but it is not a scam, as you suggest. Tell me one coin that wouldn´t collapse if the first-movers decide to sell-off. Panic will be caused everywere. This is an experiment and whoever invests money he can´t afford to lose is stupid as f*** and shouldn´t complain if he or she sells off with huge losses. Again: every crypto needs to take care of the distribution issue as it is a risk to stable exchange rates, but this doesn´t make jack a scam.


Uhm...well...if you believe every stupid propaganda... I never believed that crypto IS ALREADY an alternative to fiat. It will take years to take it there. But the deal is that a journey usually has a beginning and a final destination and people tend to start at the beginning and not at the final destination. You didn´t know that? Now you know.


Lol, what kind of tech guy are you that you thought crypto is annonymous? It´s pseudonymous, and everyone knows.


You know, every good conspiracy starts with "Why do you think...". It´s when I know I can stop reading because the talking individual has no hard proof to provide.


So what you say is, people with large amounts of money pumped Quark and eventually sold off. So isn´t that an argument against your claim of a bad distribution? I was never a fan of Bill Still and when I saw Max Keiser talked about Quark I knew this was a bad thing, but that´s (unfortunately) life: you can´t control the actions of others, especially with crypto. There are pumpers in every currency, but I won´t let you blame me for them.


The staff? Which staff?


Conclusion: You provide a lot of ble ble and substantial proof for the claims you make. From what you write you are everything but not new to the crypto scene, but obviously created another account instead of posting with your original ones (or others you have, i dont care). What does that make you? Reliable?

Can you elaborate on that?

If Quark was premined you should be able to provide proof. Where is your proof? I only see assumptions over assumptions. Fact is, Quark was initially mined faster than most other coins before and this lead people to call it premined, even stating nonsense like 99% of all coins were already mined. While I agree, that there was propaganda and people talking nonsense (like with basically all Altcoins) I can only tell you that, that you are unfortunately in the same boat sitting next to them.

Who are you again?

I can accept your oppinion but you also need to accept that people already provided their arguments against this solution (e.g. Y3llowb1ackbird - I [and others] covered his concerns).  



Development funds can be raised without pumping "just another coin" (if that´s what the companion coin would be - if it would be better I don´t see why people shouldn´t sell off all their QRK and go with this coin).

Again, that is pure assumption. Everyone I spoke with had no problems with additional features.


Your main problem seems to be funding. I also think we need funding for development and community building - but raising that funds with just another shitcoin? Why not raising it from the community then? How many Quarks would you be talking?

I think it´s worth to keep gathering information on the document because information in the forum disappear. Some really valuable information has been provided and I feel much less worried now.

Some of our core members are currently working on a new forum that will allow for more community participation. I think we should push things forward here. While we need capable developers to work on the code, the discussion process should be as effective as possible. We will soon need test users who help us to improve functionality. Who is willing to help us?

Also if you are a webdev or know some basic CSS coding your help is much welcome.

Next week I will release a game project draft that promotes Quark and needs funding. All of those who are seriously worried: please join the quarkuniverse IRC

https://kiwiirc.com/client/kornbluth.freenode.net/?nick=webguest#quarkuniverse

As you may or may not know, community members meet there, talk about Quark issues and join forces.

You can also chat with the new Social-Wallet (if you haven´t tried it already)

Btw. you can also join me in the same document where we are developing a solid structure for the future forum of Quark. The forum is meant to be the place where

- the Foundation informs about ongoing projects & update status
- the Community elects representants of the Foundation or expresses their opinion on routelines the Foundation should take
- the Community develops projects and joins taskforces
- the Community crowdfunds ideas
- the Community earns Quark for participation in discussion processes (like this one)
- add what you like

If you want to help out with the tech, you can also join #quarkuniverse and contact us (cashmen, iamfx, jomk)

@ReRaise, Cryptohunter, ycagel, Gondel anyone

Meet me in the document and let´s put those different ideas with pros and cons together so we have a list:

http://bit.ly/quarkscenarios

I answered the question already in the proposal. Beside that it doesn't really mattter how many units you get but how much share you get (1:0.9).


Yep. (Isn't ptoof of burn exactly that?)


Anyway, In my opinion we are currently spending too much time in discussing a solution that should be a last resort and not our first interest. I won't advocate this solution if there is ANY other solution that will raise hashrate and trust.

Sure is that in comparison to you I will be the hell of a storyteller


Better than telling that everything is fine like you do, right?.


You know, people usually draw their conclusions from how they would act on their own

P.S. Also funny to hear that talk from a guy who is advertising GoldCoin with his account lulz


Soooo, let's see what you provided: exactly what I expected. Thanks for nothing. >> ignore

That needs to be figured out by someone who has a better technical understanding than me. I am all for using Quark Algo but it may be a problem due to POS+POW


@coinerer
 Keep repeating. Quark deserves muxh better? I am all on your side. No provide this solution,

Why would they do it? Because a) they don't lose anything and b) they get something for it: everyone knows that people can only spend a small part of their property and that if they dump the other part is essentially lost. AND everyone knows that everyone knows - sounds odd but this condition actually causes trust. People would all sit innthe same boat and know that they need (and will) rely on each other. This effect gets smaller the more time passes. Thia gives Core time to build a solid infrastructure and decreases pumping & dumping.


May be lost,  maybe not. Would depend on how Quark develops. If there us no Quark at that tme but the whole community migrated to Core I dont see why the project couldn't be switched too. But yeah, highly hypothetical.  On the other hand: When ShaqFu arrives and Quark is highly instable this could be pretty awkward...



I dont think that the price is important at all. What mattets is prospect. A coin with dedicated developers andcommunity will raise people's interest and give prospect to the project.  If there is no prospect then value will eventually reach 0. I don't think Quark has no prospect, but if it turns out that development will stagnate then it is rather mobing towards 0.

Of course, if you call for radical approaches like this one you expect a rise of value, but in the end the market decides, not us.

@Yellow

Yeah, have the same concerns with regard to the companion coin. I would expect the community to  "fork" eventually. Proof of burn allows people to chose freely and it ensures that EVERYONE donates to the community.

@coinerer

Keep repeating...Quark deserves better? I am 100% with you. Now provide these solution en detalle and I will be happy to follow.

P.S. Your compiled wallets don't help with the hashrate issue.

Please, go ahead. Really, I know that if we don´t take action that it is just talk, but unfortunately talk and concept precedes action (at least for me). In this thread and in another I posted some rather detailed sketches of what we could do. I haven´t seen others developing comparable proposals and yes, I would like to hear more but I am not willing to "just do it".

I can tell you what I think we should do first:
1. having different elaborated options
2. talking to Max Guevara and ask him what he thinks about it

I personally won´t stay with Quark if the prospect of Quark is "business as usual" but I think before talking the situation worse than it probably is, talking to the dev is obligatory to me. Anyway, by that time, we should have set up several scenarios on our backhand. I hosted a doc at

http://bit.ly/quarkscenarios

I will fill in my proposal later. Please provide yours.

Well, I bought Quarks for about 300 EUR I believe 90% of all Quark investors didn´t buy more (just my personal estimation). There are of course several holders who hold a lot more than that and where serious money is at stake, so yes, you are right, I was referring to what I believe is the majority and those of you who have more Quark than the avarage Quarker should be even more interested in a solution that gives more value to the currency. But then again, this is only my personal opinion. I don´t believe that Quark will die but I think we should act anyway to reach out to the current competitors in the top 10 market cap. I believe we can get there again, but I don´t believe we will get there for nothing.


What I referred to was a sort of last choice in case we won´t be able to find another reliable perspective. Proof-of-burn would be one way to raise money for community and development, design things from scratch and catch some attention in the crypto scene but I won´t play down the fact that it would imply a lot of hard work and risk.