QRKfx ... any word on core?
I think he is in contact with devs from previous messages, although an update would nice. I think a good time to release a coin might be when Bitcoin starts going on the upside, which has positive influence on the released coin as well (but it's hard to plan and you never know if Bitcoin even might go up like it did before) From there it's the matter of dev involvement with the community to keep it interesting which quark failed to do at the time. |
|
|
|
|
hm thought it was quarkfx design since the reddit banner is his work
|
|
|
|
|
@georgem thats quarkfx design
|
|
|
|
@ digitalindustry I'm one of the devs at quark Reddit and let me show you some stats regarding our reddit traffic.   As you see it has basically no traffic and subscribers have not increased since months. It's always the same couple members posting and not counting sock puppets accounts which yourself have such account as well. People have the right to chose if they want to stay or not and have the right to make their own projects, same goes for community members and investors which are tired of seeing the awful price decrease with no active development and community, so imo you have no right to criticise them. I get the idea that some just are waiting for the "next Bitcoin bubble" that might have it's influence on quark or else without that many don't see quark rising on it's own feet. Core members gave it the benefit of the doubt once back in December but it didn't happen because you didn't really cooperated with them and again same happened with core members who came next. So the problem is not these members but something else right. |
|
|
|
Very interesting. With a good dev team behind it i think it will be a great coin.Are VIC and coinmama on board? One of the reason which makes this interesting. |
|
|
|
It's interesting to see how people cry that they are against and ask question that proof that they actually haven't read the document  I read the reddit, and glanced over the document. I am not sympathetic to the whole premise, so I am probably not going to read the document in all detail when I am not even agreeing with the premise (the description of the "supposed" problem). Therefor any proposed "solutions" don't really make sense to me. Noone forces you into agreeing with the premise and if the concept is carried out then still noone forces you to burn tokens. This is not a fork proposal. Whoever wants to participate participates, whoever prefers to stay stays. However, if you complain about the concept you should ar least know what it is about, otherwise it makes your whole point look quite ridiculous. Btw. Georgem what serious business have YOU built for Quark? Instead of asking others to not waste their time with utter nonsense you should maybe do something for Quark on your own. Or have I overseen your rich contributions? Haven't seen any. +1 Wouldn't it be more suitable to have customised % to the slow maturing coins to the amount someone is burning? If someone would burn only like 1000 tokens then he can't really shake the market with dumping and his coins are not much anyway so it would be more fair the lower the amount you burn, the less % initial phase will be or like the faster your coin will mature? @ georgem I think first you should read the whole concept. Also these players are killing a crypto with their pump and dumps. It will give the coin a bad reputation where people will say it's another pump and dump, this coin is limiting the ability of these guys to ruin a coin with their scheme and it's actually the first that i've seen which has come up with a model to do this and instead aims for a steady rise with less hardcore dumping. This give the coin much more credibility imo. If you want to dump all your coins whenever you want there are enough cryptos and i think with all these pump and dump schemes there should be space for new models like these who is adapted to these schemes. |
|
|
|
I'm impressed with the draft, what i like about Peter is that he as an ambitious dev (or one of the devs) of this coin who is connected to the community and is a strong favour of transparency, this alone build trust. About the slowly maturing coins aka initial phase, if i understood right 50% will be paid back monthly spread into 5 years. Lets say someone needs his 50% or a major part of it, is it possible to request? Adding community fund of 20% makes 70% of the fund stored away. Wouldn't this 70% hold some off from investing/burning despite the issues it can solve? Well yes, this is a deterrent to speculants and that is fully intended because while it reduces liquidity for a certain period it allows long term planning: as i wrote in the draft, this has zo be understood like a contract between all participants to not dump their holdings. If it could be hedged as proposed by Josh the sense would be undermined in a way and give way to speculation. Just my opinion on it. I see, fair explanation. Overal looking forward to this I could imagine those who burn would want to know if their investment is safe hands. I know this is legit but would appreciate if you could explain on that? and also if someone would want to request funds for personal reasons how would that go? Yeah, I am by no means advocating the hedge...I was just exploring the implications. QuarkFx is correct it will cause way too much volatility compared to the benefits. Basically, burners just have to trust the reputation of the people creating the new coin...same as any other coin that does PoB or IPO. Hopefully, with Quark veterans behind the project, people will trust us. After the Genesis block is mined, it will all be transparent because all the new coins will show up in your wallet, although some of them will be immature until predetermined block numbers in the future.What do you mean by your statement "if someone would want to request funds for personal reasons how would that go?" By the new coins showing in the wallet you mean both the slowly maturing coins of 50% + the 30%? Will the slow maturing coin be in my wallet or hold elsewhere? By the last statement i mean, lets say i would like to have my slowly maturing coins back all at once because of personal reasons, is this possible? |
|
|
|
I'm impressed with the draft, what i like about Peter is that he as an ambitious dev (or one of the devs) of this coin who is connected to the community and is a strong favour of transparency, this alone build trust. About the slowly maturing coins aka initial phase, if i understood right 50% will be paid back monthly spread into 5 years. Lets say someone needs his 50% or a major part of it, is it possible to request? Adding community fund of 20% makes 70% of the fund stored away. Wouldn't this 70% hold some off from investing/burning despite the issues it can solve? Well yes, this is a deterrent to speculants and that is fully intended because while it reduces liquidity for a certain period it allows long term planning: as i wrote in the draft, this has zo be understood like a contract between all participants to not dump their holdings. If it could be hedged as proposed by Josh the sense would be undermined in a way and give way to speculation. Just my opinion on it. I see, fair explanation. Overal looking forward to this I could imagine those who burn would want to know if their investment is safe hands. I know this is legit but would appreciate if you could explain on that? and also if someone would want to request funds for personal reasons how would that go? |
|
|
|
I'm impressed with the draft, what i like about Peter is that he as an ambitious dev (or one of the devs) of this coin who is connected to the community and is a strong favour of transparency, this alone build trust. About the slowly maturing coins aka initial phase, if i understood right 50% will be paid back monthly spread into 5 years. Lets say someone needs his 50% or a major part of it, is it possible to request? Adding community fund of 20% makes 70% of the fund stored away. Wouldn't this 70% hold some off from investing/burning despite the issues it can solve? |
|
|
|
Thanks for everybody who donated.
I will continue experimenting, to find out what stylistic elements (and memes) go well with quark.
(I think certainly science fiction and space in general will go well with quark)
If anyone has serious suggestions and feedback, I welcome it.
How about simple robot face for the logo. When I first saw Quark I thought it was a robot face. The 3 circles look like eyes and mouth.  |
|
|
|
Hey guys, as was written I am currently working on a Proof of Work concept paper. The draft is almost finished and if you want to peek in feel free to hit me a PM and I can make it available to you if you help with proof reading.
do you mean proof of burn? I think he means the algorithm of the PoB coin |
|
|
|
Does the cap of the PoB coin depend on how many quarks will be traded?
I think there are a couple different ways you can do it NetNox. 1. Set an IPO cap and distribute proportionally. Ex. assume there is a coin cap of 10 million coins for the IPO/Burn. - If a total of 1 million Quarks are donated, you will receive 10 Newcoins for every 1 Quark you burn.
- If a total of 50 million Quarks are burned, you receive 1 Newcoin for every 5 Quarks you burn.
2. Establish a fixed conversion rate, ex. 1 QRK to 1 Newcoin. In this case, you can burn as many Quarks as you want and receive an equal number of Newcoins. For #2, there are a bunch of different options you can do though. For instance, you can set a limit on how many coins will be available in the sale. Ex. have a 10 million Newcoin IPO cap but still have a fixed 1:1 (or whatever) conversion rate. Personally, I prefer option #1 because it lets the market decide how valuable the Newcoins are. Option #2 is what Ethereum is currently doing with their Ether presale. I worry this option creates an artificial price that could cause fluctuations once the coin is put on exchanges. I see, interesting points |
|
|
|
|
Does the cap of the PoB coin depend on how many quarks will be traded?
|
|
|
|
I think PoB is the best option
+1 POB as explained by QRKfx sounds like it could solve a lot of QRKs problems if not all of them. I still prefer the QRK only IPO. Only because i see no reason to destroy qrks for good. The QRK only ipo rather stores them away from the market until a time that demand builts and they can be released again in return for more services and projects. It is just like POB in every other way only the QRK is not destroyed for good and is held by the foundation to give incentive for incoming developers wishing to join the qrk project or sold to the market once demand is there for fiat to pay for developments and services by those that will work for but not essentially join in with our qrk/companion coin community. Either way is good and achieves similar goals. Burning QRK will inflate the price of qrk, so it will cost less qrk to get things done, however with the qrk only ipo the price of qrk will rise at the same rate as long as it is not released to the market. It will build a nice foundation pot. This pot we will use to get services and projects completed that will push up demand for qrks. So the difference to me is. QRK through POB will rise in price due to scarcity and some new projects and services. Qrk only ipo will achieve the same results but the price rise will eventually be more due to the fact of even greater demand based upon the many more services and projects that can be funded with the qrk that would have otherwise be burned. The key here is the qrk is not released until the projects and services are live and demand is increased. The POB or QRK only ipo could solve many if not all of qrks current issues if handled correctly. development pot - bring on some real developers to work full time - pay qrk foundation member % for projects they complete etc coins for rewarding the mining of qrk on foundation approved pools - hash rate increase for qrk Burn rate can depending upon activity rate within community- bring back those investors that have forgotten about qrk, and new investors should get involved too. new features the market demands to increase member uptake into the commuity along with their BTC. Really though, if done correctly the POB or qrk only ipo looks very promising. The KEY here is attracting or finding an awesome development team that can actually code out a coin the alt community really does see as a promising prospect. The % decided upon must rely upon what they can deliver and released only in stages for results. So what do you get in return for the quark you give for the ipo? What i imagine with ipo is you pay and get back shares or coins in return. Yes with the QRK only ipo. You are essentially buying the companion coins from the foundation for QRK. Depending on the minting for example say the companion coin was 330M or even 360M Depending on the development pot we decide the companion coin needs to attract the development team we want and fund the projects and services we want ...example 60M (20%) So if the foundation holds that in a transparent wallet for the community to spend as we see fit to bring on a great dev team and start some big projects and services. Then 300M remain. You will be able to buy one companion coin for one quark. Although that is just an example. We need to use this companion coin to bring all the new improvements and features the market has shown people want, and ALSO solve qrks issues with hashrate. So perhaps we work out away to retain some additional companion coin to reward miners of QRK on foundation approved QRK pools. The burn rate or buy limits can also be governed by things like community participation and contributions, so the huge wallets can't simply move their entire shares to the companion coin at will without becoming involved with the community. There are endless possibilities with the companion coin either through POB or quark only ipo, if used to max potential there is huge upside. I mean the companion coin could even be only 70% premined and 30% will come from merge mining with qrk. Or whatever % we decide. The important thing is for this to benefit qrk holders that are actively involved with promoting qrk, to held secure qrk and bring in new blood and their BTC through a great dev/marketing/project managment teams that can create desirable features, services and general reason to invest in the qrk family of coins. Interesting read, quarkfx has in mind to present a paper for the concept of a PoB coin on sunday. |
|
|
|
|
I think PoB is the best option
|
|
|
|
@ Cryptohunter are you going to be present at sunday? There is a meeting between members which decisions are going to made on how to go further hope you join see this link http://doodle.com/7kddvnndc8ympgu2Same goes for VIC, Hilux and some other guys from Reddit as well |
|
|
|
This sounds interesting for quark, but unfirtunatly accepting the coin only in one video game will not be a big change for it :/ BR Well the big news about it is that for the first time Crypto can be used for consoles meaning for wii-xbox360-ps3-xbox one and ps4 and the game itself is pretty nice as well with a talented dev team behind it. I'm actually looking forward to it |
|
|
|
All very interesting while you guys were spending all that energy trolling here - I was helping get Quark integrated with FrozenBit:
frozenbit.io/
A fully integrated Multi sig wallet that will give Quark investors access to :
- Two factor auth
- an iOS wallet
- an Android wallet
- Live security in real time
and much more.
also I look forward to hearing from the community about Max's response from that email that was just sent in which he basically (common sense)
said that anyone can create any crypto and the market will judge it, also has the ability to Merge mine , also i can confirm the frustrating lack of communication sometimes.
but Max is the best dev in Crypto (certainly one of)
i don't doubt that he could have coded the original Bitcoin protocol.
------------------------------
Doesn't the quark wallet have multisig as well? I personally would never store my coins on a cloud but on my own computer. So i don't see it as a huge deal. Well no doubt anyone can create a crypto, but if your purpose is to create a crypto to merge mine with quark then the community and core members have the right to know everything about the project, you can do it by yourself but it will fail. but Max is the best dev in Crypto (certainly one of)"
How so, i haven't seen other features added besides checkpointing, not much activity (lately a little) and not connected with the community because he said himself that he won't have time for anything more than the occasional code update, but he agreed himself willing to share full access to other devs, but again for new devs and neat features integrated to the core code there are serious funds needed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
