There is a saying, trust...but verify.  One of the four blocks for coin success (in my book) is trust, and the Compassion bills go a long way to proving our funds go where they should, more could be done.

I trust the dev, I also feel that a block chain report showing when coins were sold and for how much would be a good addition to the charity proposals.  If coins were pre-sold and then the actual coins from the budget replaced them, it should be fairly easy to show in the block chain which again, would intensify the trust in the project.

I'd also propose funds be sold daily for 20 days after the superblock, 5% per day at market rates.  And I'd like to see the Foundation handling this process rather than it falling on one individuals shoulders (since the accounting could become a significant task).  And again, a block-chain report showing BBP-BTC transaction, BTC-USD transactions and the corresponding values.

hehe of course i'm excluded i dont have free electricity, and this is only investment that i need to pay somehow. computers which i buy, i can sell maybe for higher price so this is not a problem. but as there is byteball, i can cover electricity bills, so it is not so catastrophic. coins... we will see, i'm now littre affraid but it allways be as on rollercoaster so if there will be support for coin i believe in brighter tomorrows )). my calculations are, that it could cover monthly costs with price about 6 sat... but i believe that in real price somewhere around 25, but we ned 3-4x more investors/miners to be stable to withstand monthly superblocks

Wow, that's a nice find, Slavino. I think some explanations are in order.

I checked the "accountability" page and this also looks really strange. The last legit invoice from Compassion seems to be from April 22nd (complete print-out of the checkout page). All the newer ones are just plain text BS-PDFs with no signature, no invoice number, not even a slight hint that any money was actually paid (it only says "total amount due"). For Bloom there isn't even a single PDF; Kairo looks legit but of course this is only a very minor payment.

So where did all the proposal payments go to? Can we have some actual payment proof from May 2018 on until August 2018? Deleting all these posts won't help, since they are saved externally.

P.S.: At the slovak guys: Cursing and foul-mouthing doesn't help either; especially not the children...

Well, the idea was that we would continue to add value to BiblePay in order to attract new investors. And this would enable us to sell BBP on the market for the children. As far as I know, we hit all points on the roadmap, some even way before their stipulated dates, and Rob is working very hard on adding features. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be enough currently.

I don't want this project to fail, so if the price continues to drop, I will vote a 'no' on the current proposal for Compassion. There is no money involved in this project that I care about losing. I just do this from my heart right now. And my heart tells me that this project matters. That's why I don't want this project to fail.

I'm not blind. I agree that we currently most probably have too many sponsorships. I want that number to go down as low as it needs to go. And after that, I want sustainable growth. It that means only 1 orphan per month, then so be it.

I also don't want to ignore our investors. 10% should be 10% in my opinion. Nothing more. That 10% is our motto, and in steady conditions the market should have few problems absorbing that 10% in my opinion.

And you realize that you are part of the problem, right? All your FUD is tarnishing our reputation. I don't understand your motives, because it seems that it is your own investment that your FUD'ing away here.

it always was 10% to charity, but now budget is almost 20% and still not enough. 10% should be 10% every month. one month it will be 10k $, another month 5k $...
if somebody 'allocated' more orphans than 10% could cover, then it must be lowered. you simply cant create money from nothing. even if you sell all coins generated during month (~75m), you will not have enough. and next month what? all moneys should go to marketing now, few new big miners could help a lot. 10m buy for stake takes price to 20sat

BiblePay does not recover gracefully if it loses internet connection. If it goes on for a prolonged period, say a few hours, it asks for the wallet password, then quits after you enter it. When you restart, it rebuilds the chain again.

There goes Rob again with his crazy talk.

Seriously though, this would be easy to do if we had a simple way to get all the IPFS attachments as a list. It'd be easy to curate thereafter and even host the web page on IPFS so it completely decentralized.

I'm more concerned with those smaller folks.  It's taken me a quite a while to get to where i'm at stake-wise..   I worry flooding the market with others and "instant-on" RAC will help short-term price IF they join up.

I would like to see a rate limit on the outsiders..  If your in team BBP you get 100%,  other teams you get 10% of your RAC (or something similar).
This is how Byteball does it (and also may help them to come over and start staking with less of an up-front investiment)

" There are many serious vulnerabilities in the biblepay code. Get out while this coin still has some value "
This pray showing at block 69000...anyone see it ?

bible_pay can we participate on this https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread_thread,41044_offset,0

Just want to chip in again

I said before we were at risk of becoming a 1 percent coin - that has come to pass
Huge difficulty in signing up to mine and share the rewards for the small guys

Solution

No blocks to joining or mining / stake on anyone wanting to mine up to 5000 RAC / no restrictions to heat mining / CPIDs required up to limit / other
We need numbers to come to BBP - doesnt matter where they come from

The argument some will set up multiple accts - so what? - adds up to more numbers
Maintaining multiple accts takes time and effort  - making sure RAC doesnt go over 5k to max out reward? / maintaining multiple PCs / updating wallets / etc - all add up to not being worth it
Once miners / others have a small pile of BBP - they become stakeholders - then they might want to continue building a stake - ie buy

Monthly selling of BBP needs to be done with far greater discipline
No more dumping of large blocks - I believe the agument a few superblocks ago was we are allright in the short time - just needed to obtain the months target and so dump.....
This attitude  towards selling just pisses off previous buyers who paid a lot more
Observe the last few superblocks and price action - you will see no reason to push the bid - coins will be dumped at any price - just put in a lowball bid and you will get hit

My 2c
PM

Why pay for electricity on your servers when you can generate more BBP by buying directly...

https://imgur.com/j6mPzcb

just captured when seeing.

If you haven't already, please vote on the Team Requirement proposal.  I'd hope the following would sway a no vote, but if you still feel yes (killing the team requirement) is justified, then please vote!

TLDR: I fell it's unlikely we'd gain more than 1.5M Team RAC at the most wildly generous numbers. This would, if fully staked, add only 30M BBP demand for the coin, which is roughly 1 month of average volume/15 days of newly minted coins.

So, here is my logic on why removing the Team Requirement is not going to help.

First off, as a holder and big PoDC miner of BBP, there are two conflicting thoughts that present before considering the actual primary issue. The first is if the BBP Team Requirement (which I'll save some typing and call BBP-TR) is removed, but we also ban other coin teams (basically Gridcoin and Byteball) then one of two things could happen. One, nothing. Two, we could spike our RAC. A spike in Team RAC would make mining unprofitable for most if not all current users unless you had some unique advantage such as dirt cheap power. So the current miners, like myself would drop out. So we'd need a HUGE spike to offset this. If we did see a huge spike in RAC and that corresponded to a similar long-term increase in price, then as a big holder, I should welcome this. Sure I wouldn't be mining anymore but, in silly terms, if price went up 100x because the RAC went up 200x, then I'm coming out great!

The issue is this. Look at Byteball. There is no team requirement, in fact wasn't even a Byteball Team for the longest time, and the benefit for being on the team is still small. I can account for most of the top 10, which is about 50% of the distribution. I'm pretty close to the top 10, in fact most of the top 10 is Team BPP, but I'd wager the rest of the other BBP users don't know much about it either and are either 1) cashing out when they mine or 2) hoping for a price increase since this is basically "free" coins.

So the question becomes, where are all the team members from Hard[OCP], US Navy, Oracle, Overclock Forums, etc? Why are they not participating in Byteball? I don't see them in any large numbers (at least in coins rewarded, since again, I've got most the top 10 covered and the top 10 is about half the reward), Byteball is incredibly easy to set up. It's trivial enough I think my beginner computer friends could get linked to Byteball following the instructions. However, none of them would be able to figure out our coin without help, and then the issue of buying crytpo to stake, would end that discussion. So I don't think (if we block Team Gridcoin and Team Byteball) we'll see many new users from this, since the most crypto savvy ones are going to be blocked. And the rest of the teams, as evidenced by their non-participation in Byteball, which has far less complexity, are not interested. Or maybe because in part, most of the big teams, don't do much CPU BOINC.

But that thought aside, let's look at some very hard numbers. If we could get a 1% conversion rate, that is, by removing the BBP-TR, we would get 1% of the overall user base to become BBP users and fully stake their mining, what would that really mean? (and for the record I think 1% is way too high). At R@h, we're anywhere between 15-20% of the daily work done, Gridcoin is usually about 10%. Yesterday the two teams combined accounted for roughly 29% of the work at R@h. So if we got 1% of the remaining 71% that would be 225K RAC. At World Community Grid, we're about 3%, Gridcoin is about 4.6% and Byteball is about .5%. So between all three projects we're basically 8% of the total. Again, if we could get 1% of the remaining 92% that's about 1.2M RAC. Even rounding up we're looking at, again in my opinion of the best case, roughly 1.5M RAC added to our team. That would create demand for 30M BBP to stake, which is roughly 1 month of our average volume, or about 15 days worth of newly minted coins. How would that affect us? Who knows, but probably not by more than a few satoshi of value in the medium term.

In the end, the market is poor all around. We've overextended our support of orphans given the fall in price. Removing the BBP-TR is removing one of the potential major marketing points of the coin, the hard and fast numbers of how many people we've added to the cause of scientific research. How many we can lay exclusive claim to for being on BOINC. We're the number 3 team ALL TIME at Rosetta@home, set to be number two by mid-October. And number one in RAC there. We're number 89 all time at World Community Grid and should break into the top 50 by the end of the year, all while being the fifth highest there in RAC. Giving up that potential marketing angle for what I suspect will be a pittance of users seems not worth the effort. And using that programming time (however small) seems to be a poor use of resources in an increasingly lean time.

" There are many serious vulnerabilities in the biblepay code. Get out while this coin still has some value "
This pray showing at block 69000...anyone see it ?

The question was why he has only one podcupdate when he is running 24/7