You're going to be running taint analysis on the stake buys and booting out multi-stakers? I bought more than a few shares myself but as instructed I used new accounts and sent from different addresses. Prior from what I just read, I understood this was acceptable. Or will it be retro-d in?
Will my money as well as others doing the same be honored or thrown put and will there be refunds issued? I just need to clear this up.
There will be refunds for big-multi-accounters. The goal is to distribute the stakes widely and evenly (but not perfectly even) Taint analysis is taking it way too far. NEM will be reduced to people arguing over each other's taint. This is unfair to the earlier people who spent many hours creating new accounts (waiting 4 hours before they could post on each one). The newer people now know that they have to mix their coins between wallets to hide the taint. The earlier people were told it was fine to use new accounts with unique wallets, nobody said anything about taint analysis or having to send their coins through a mixer. Applying taint analysis is very unfair to people who did not know mixing their coins was ANOTHER hassle they had to go through. With taint analysis: The guy who put in the effort and money to get 10 stakes, but did not send his coins through a mixer, gets a refund. While the guy who put in the effort and money to get 10 stakes AND mixed his coins, gets to keep his 10 stakes. How is that fair? Utopianfuture said over and over he would not be applying new rules retroactively. Please stick to your word and don't apply new rules like taint analysis retroactively. There are no new rules 4. How could you prevent multiple buy-ins ? In short - We can't. Multiple buy-in will be possible with multiple accounts. We also want you to have the ability to buy a NEM stake for your loved ones so they could all join the movement. However accumulating many NEM stakes goes against NEM's principles of fairness and equality, therefore the development team reserves the right to refund you the money if an effort to unfairly accumulate NEM stakes is discovered. NEM Flickr page http://www.flickr.com/photos/115246188@N06/So the guy who puts his coins through a mixer gets to keep his 10 stakes, but the guy who didn't put his coins through a mixer gets a refund then? We were told new address, new account was enough. Nobody mentioned the requirement to use a coin mixer until the last few pages of this thread. I've been helping family and friends buy stakes in NEM. I did not know I had to mix the coins though. Are all my friends and family going to lose their NEM stakes because their bitcoin wallets connect back to mine? Read what uptopian posted: "therefore the development team reserves the right to refund you the money if an effort to unfairly accumulate NEM stakes is discovered" It's not about you helping your friends - You'll be fine. It's about people buying > 10 stakes. Also it was never okay to to buy more than 2 stakes. 1 for you and 1 for your loved ones. Sending them through a mixer would not have it made okay it would just have prevented taint analysis. |
|
|
|
I think it's pretty vital we decide on a logo and slogan now and stick to it.
Once this has been done, the NEM brand can be fully established and implemented on the forums/websites/advertisements which will pop up quite soon into the future. It will help enormously to promote NEM and to spread word about it. The thing is; how do we, as a community, decide on a logo? A poll? Or will it just be chosen by the devs? Whatever it is, it should happen fairly soon.  I somewhat agree. I mean we got the slogan. "New Economy Movement". There's always "No envy Movement" in the room but I think we shout shoot that horse in the face since it'll remind people of the whole stake thing and how unfair it was and bla bla bla. Logo...hmmm...did we collect em all yet ? Has everyone uploaded his Logo to that gallery utopian postet a couple days ago ? Let's wait until wednesday to give the fellas reading this a little time to upload everything and then we can commence a vote. (plenty of possibilites online) It'd be cool to get something done. Progress always motivates @Utopian: Could you post that gallery again ? It's lost in the realm of 50 previous pages |
|
|
|
|
Has anyone talked to Graviton yet regarding selling NEM on dgex ?
|
|
|
|
|
Okay so appearantly we're seeing the down side of getting a lot of crypto-newbies in.
I can see how the crypto world could be somewhat confusing and intimidating to people that invested money here for the first time but you will need to realize something very quickly:
If you invest money in a new project you are trusting a complete stranger with it. He may give you daily updates, he may give you monthly updates or he may run away with your money and kill your cat on the way. This is the way things work in this world.
Would I wan't daily updates ? Sure ! Will I request them ? No !
I trusted utopian and the rest of the team with my money and now I have to wait and see what comes out of it - That's how it works.
Also it's not like we're completely in the dark. He has given updates and Jaguar just said that he'll be releasing the development plan as soon as it's done. - What more do you wan't ?
Would it be better if they told you every day that "Work is in progress" ?
About the guy utopian refunded. Utopian calls to shot on this project regarding marketing, fundraising and what not. He'll do as he sees fit. Don't you guys have jobs ? What would your boss do if you did something that he didn't like ?
For all the risk you are taking you are getting a huge chance in return. Imagine NEM would have the same success as NXT does. You would have paid around 50 bucks to get them multiplied and multiplied for doing exactly nothing on your part.
I'm really not trying to kiss anyones ass it's just getting a little boring listening to the newbies cry for updates.
|
|
|
|
 I bet there are others who could do better  It looks awesome dude ! Isn't CGB POW / POS though ? You only mention POS. |
|
|
|
This is not an IPO. It is a call to building a community. And you are no longer welcome. I exercise the right of the development team to change fundraising term in the disclaimer and refund you the money.
and the reason for refunding my money is...... I asked some tough questions??? Anyway I thought you are just one another stakeholder in this whole project. I asked these questions on behalf of the community and if the community decides to refund me , please go ahead. Otherwise as a stake holder I need reasons and I want to know what I did wrong. Egalitarian, no dictator, for the community bla bla bla , my a$$. Open your eyes and see what you are doing now. later. Reason: violating other member's right to privacy in a public forum. Following this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422129.msg4834605#msg48346050.03 btc is refunded to the sending address in the following this transaction https://blockchain.info/tx-index/280a984c9f09d2a2e3dc42fc7f27495e9396dfcb7ffac87a989965e019513945Don't think he'll mind. Looking at the blockchain he might have more stakes. |
|
|
|
This is not an IPO. It is a call to building a community. And you are no longer welcome. I exercise the right of the development team to change fundraising term in the disclaimer and refund you the money.
and the reason for refunding my money is...... I asked some tough questions??? Anyway I thought you are just one another stakeholder in this whole project. I asked these questions on behalf of the community and if the community decides to refund me , please go ahead. Otherwise as a stake holder I need reasons and I want to know what I did wrong. Egalitarian, no dictator, for the community bla bla bla , my a$$. Open your eyes and see what you are doing now. later. Reason: violating other member's right to privacy in a public forum. Following this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422129.msg4834605#msg48346050.03 btc is refunded to the sending address in the following this transaction https://blockchain.info/tx-index/280a984c9f09d2a2e3dc42fc7f27495e9396dfcb7ffac87a989965e019513945instant justice! Judge, jury and executioner! Don't you have better things to do than hang around here ? Like working on your own project ? |
|
|
|
Anyone complaining that an account with > 5/10 stakes is being "persecuted" should immediately be investigated!  Go ahead. The point is that the early existing sock puppets were able to get unlimited accounts with almost 0 effort in anything. Yet we are selectively going after later guys, just because there is method for tracing them. I'd say make all the people who paid nothing somehow verify themselves too. Patmaster. You need to determine what exchange addresses are. You will continue running into them with your taint analysis. I am not sure the best way to do this though. Ideas ? I know if you trace NXT like this you're going to find a lot of funding from the 2-3 (?) exchanges that are the only source of NXT. I'm not even sure exchanges always use the same addresses. If we're serious about this taint analysis it'll be a butload of work that may "catch" the wrong people. Not very motivating I have to say. |
|
|
|
Somebody keeps pushing the NXT price down. It's really annoying. It's annoying.
It is called a market opportunity.Buy now, that is cheap. Would you rather wait for .001 to double your stake? I think the big stake holders has finally undesrtood that NXT is going nowhere and is starting to dump their coins. IMHO that's BS but who knows. |
|
|
|
@The whole fraudster and multi account topic.
Koreem and I are already sweeping through the regsitration pages (Koreem has done way more I just started yestersay) and already found some multi-accs. I'm gessing utopian is also looking. The more the merrier so if you have time go ahead and check the blockchains.
If you do it remember that you have to check the history of an address as well. The multi accs I found were only discovered because I checked where the used addresses were funded from in the first place.
As I understand it the current plan is to collect all the intell until fundraising is over and then publicly discuss the cases and refund them if they have more than 10 stakes.
I myself believe that 10 is actually a lot and we should start at 5 but let's hear some thoughts.
What about for the people who gave NXTs to who friends and family who never heard of Cryptocurrencies? For example I gave NXTs to my aunt, and a friend in England. They gave me money for them and I helped them through the process? I also have extensive Facebook conversation helping my England friend out. There still have to be cases like that because as simple as the whole thing is for me, it's virtually impossible for people who are less tech savvy. Many people dismiss me when I tell them about them, but I'm very motivated to help the few that trust me. I think we are opening a can of worms here. If we are going to question everything, why not question the first 20 pages where you can just paste interested and you get a stake. How do we prove there is no multi accounter there? Or how do we weed out the multi-accters in the thread 1 where you can just fund via the exchange? In my view, what is happening here is we are doing selective persecution. We are persecuting the late comers vs those early ones when it seems like free-for-all. Is it because we are already in the thread 1, so we don't want as much people to come in and so, we are starting to persecute those that are in thread 2? (I am registered in thread 1, one of the early few) Let us focus instead on getting the source code up! Or our investment will all go to waste. This is becoming a MOST ENVY MOVEMENT. Just my two cents. The prople working on the code are focusing on coding - that's totally unrelated. I think it's good to show that we are willing to put in some time and effort to make it as fair as possible. Of course it's never going to be a 100% fair but it'll be as fair as possible. I am not saying coding is related to the mult-accter. Like the previous posts on P-O-N, I am saying we should focus instead on a healthy discussion on the mechanics of the coin so that the source code could be up soon. Well, I don't see the fairness in applying rules retroactively to thread 2 stakes when these rules are impossible to check for thread 1 stakes. If you want fairness, I suggest we start the registration all over again, and make sure everyone submits a valid ID and passport photo. We're not applying anything retroactively. I agree that this thread should be focused on mechanics and stuff so let's drop the topic right here Have we agreed on a balance between POS and PON yet ? Has jaguar stated his opinion on this ? |
|
|
|
@The whole fraudster and multi account topic.
Koreem and I are already sweeping through the regsitration pages (Koreem has done way more I just started yestersay) and already found some multi-accs. I'm gessing utopian is also looking. The more the merrier so if you have time go ahead and check the blockchains.
If you do it remember that you have to check the history of an address as well. The multi accs I found were only discovered because I checked where the used addresses were funded from in the first place.
As I understand it the current plan is to collect all the intell until fundraising is over and then publicly discuss the cases and refund them if they have more than 10 stakes.
I myself believe that 10 is actually a lot and we should start at 5 but let's hear some thoughts.
What about for the people who gave NXTs to who friends and family who never heard of Cryptocurrencies? For example I gave NXTs to my aunt, and a friend in England. They gave me money for them and I helped them through the process? I also have extensive Facebook conversation helping my England friend out. There still have to be cases like that because as simple as the whole thing is for me, it's virtually impossible for people who are less tech savvy. Many people dismiss me when I tell them about them, but I'm very motivated to help the few that trust me. I think we are opening a can of worms here. If we are going to question everything, why not question the first 20 pages where you can just paste interested and you get a stake. How do we prove there is no multi accounter there? Or how do we weed out the multi-accters in the thread 1 where you can just fund via the exchange? In my view, what is happening here is we are doing selective persecution. We are persecuting the late comers vs those early ones when it seems like free-for-all. Is it because we are already in the thread 1, so we don't want as much people to come in and so, we are starting to persecute those that are in thread 2? (I am registered in thread 1, one of the early few) Let us focus instead on getting the source code up! Or our investment will all go to waste. This is becoming a MOST ENVY MOVEMENT. Just my two cents. The prople working on the code are focusing on coding - that's totally unrelated. I think it's good to show that we are willing to put in some time and effort to make it as fair as possible. Of course it's never going to be a 100% fair but it'll be as fair as possible. |
|
|
|
@The whole fraudster and multi account topic.
Koreem and I are already sweeping through the regsitration pages (Koreem has done way more I just started yestersay) and already found some multi-accs. I'm gessing utopian is also looking. The more the merrier so if you have time go ahead and check the blockchains.
If you do it remember that you have to check the history of an address as well. The multi accs I found were only discovered because I checked where the used addresses were funded from in the first place.
As I understand it the current plan is to collect all the intell until fundraising is over and then publicly discuss the cases and refund them if they have more than 10 stakes.
I myself believe that 10 is actually a lot and we should start at 5 but let's hear some thoughts.
What about for the people who gave NXTs to who friends and family who never heard of Cryptocurrencies? For example I gave NXTs to my aunt, and a friend in England. They gave me money for them and I helped them through the process? I also have extensive Facebook conversation helping my England friend out. There still have to be cases like that because as simple as the whole thing is for me, it's virtually impossible for people who are less tech savvy. Many people dismiss me when I tell them about them, but I'm very motivated to help the few that trust me. Well that's probably why it's going to be public and everyone can make his case. If you helped a few friends it'll be fine. There'll prol be a bit of time between the transactions as well. |
|
|
|
|
@The whole fraudster and multi account topic.
Koreem and I are already sweeping through the regsitration pages (Koreem has done way more I just started yestersay) and already found some multi-accs. I'm gessing utopian is also looking. The more the merrier so if you have time go ahead and check the blockchains.
If you do it remember that you have to check the history of an address as well. The multi accs I found were only discovered because I checked where the used addresses were funded from in the first place.
As I understand it the current plan is to collect all the intell until fundraising is over and then publicly discuss the cases and refund them if they have more than 10 stakes.
I myself believe that 10 is actually a lot and we should start at 5 but let's hear some thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Let's assume 100% PON. So anyone can just install a client, setup a node and start forging even without initial stake/investment.
Why would you hold on to your stake if there is no difference in the gain. It's not about forger's profit. It's about secure system. In Nxt u need coins to generate block, more coins = more chances. It makes front-attack expensive: attacker'll need biggest part of coins to write buggy chain that still'd be most diff. one (all honest chains'll be forks in this case). If u replace PoS with PoN in start, low amount of nodes'll make network extremly vulnerable. I'm not sure even with later replacement, cos node-based attack always'll be cheaper than $/bruteforce-based attack (buy coins to generate buggy chain or crack Curve to do the same or to kill project). Should we sacriface attack cost gap for "fairness" (equal node-based forging)? I'm almost sure, that correct answer is "NO". That's actually a good point. I was all about making forging more fair but it's really about keeping the network secure. Now I'm totally for a smaller amount of PON. Maybe 30% ? |
|
|
|
|
PON = Proof Of Network. As I understand it it's basically you provide infrastructure for the network i.e. running a node and get something in return. The more you support the network the greater the likelyhood of you getting some coins.
Since I can't find any other ressource I'm gessing jaguar came up with it himself ?
|
|
|
|
Ok, let me change the subject once more please I'm a fan of the hybrid forging ideas being thrown out. While POS may lead to price stability, wouldn't it also be a deterrent to actually spending/using NEM as a currency?
I have been thinking about the PON and although I think it's a wonderfull way to show NEM's dedication to equality, it will not attract alot more people to invest in the currency. But don't get me wrong, I am not against PON, and it will certainly ensure a good network! However, after some brain flexing I have the idea that price stability is the number one goal; the second goal should be to make NEM attractive for merchants. Any currency can only become commonly used once people can actually buy things with it. And again, to attract merchants you need good stability. On the other hand, opticalcarrier's ideas are a good encouragement to actively use the currency. see here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=426303.msg4954508#msg4954508And as utopianfuture has allready pointed out, due to the distribution of NEM there is little concern about POS unfairness like earlier pointed out for NXT. So, if it were up to me I would rather go with 60% POS and 40% PON or something. This way one can still just set up a network and start forging but people would at least be encouraged not to speculate too much. So please let's share some thoughts about this I don't understand why more attention to PON would attract speculation. Could you elaborate on that ? Also I think the POS/PON combination is something new and thus would get people to invest and have interest in NEM. I'm still for 60 % PON since I deem supporting the network by running a node is more valuable than merely having coins (regardless which amount). |
|
|
|
2) Ban Newbie accounts created after NEM annoucement unless they send an email to somewhere explaining who they are, where they heard about NEM and a short bio
Do you wan't to read those 3 thousand emails ? |
|
|
|
Later taint analyses will be used to reduce further the amount of big NEM stake holders.
These are best efforts to spread NEM widely and evenly to a huge user base and it is already better than the best effort to date: counter-party protocol.
Well then plz consider my last to posts in you taint analysis as i think it's a big fish among the multiaccs. Take a note of these cases as we will use that in a public auditing after the fund raising is over. But I expect the auditing is the community's effort not mine - we can go as far as the community wants to go. After all the development fund belongs to NEM's community and to be used by the developers/ community to build the crypto we love. Well I'm willing to search that blockchain for hours. If we find a handfull other people that are willing to as well we should find most of the bigger multi accs. Kooream have been doing it for a few days. There are two others PM-ing me with solid cases as well. Everyone can do it given that the hashes, account names and the blockchain are public information. I would like to gather all the cases and make them public after the fundraising is over in a public auditing period. I would use mindmap to link wallet addresses/ account names together in visually attractive form (that's my suggestions) Alright do you need me to PM you those two cases again as well or only the ones I find from now on ? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
