Your statement is true in a very general way and well stated, that is also true about many other marketing ideas. It doesn't tell us specifically what were the unique attributes of Doge's marketing strategy.

Another angle is the tips aren't economic values but rather votes. I actually had mentioned in the past this as the possible way to use micro-tipping to better sites such as stackoverflow.

So the users are competing to see who can have the most votes, regardless that the votes have no significant economic value. So Doge is a decentralized fungible voting unit. Actually that is one of my marketing ideas. The key is how to distribute the units.

That is possible. It could be a younger generation thing that isn't on my radar. But so far, afaik no one has articulated it. So I still say that unless you state something, then you are just bullshitting and bluffing.

Edit: I do remember now someone articulating that Doge was driven by "dark" attitudes, where people just want to write nonsense comments about anything. It is sort of Twitter generation concept, where it doesn't matter what you say as much as being clever. Impressing your friends. I notice my 16 year old daughter does that excessively. It is a form of social upmanship or same as we used to do by hanging out and joking in the yard, the youth now do it virtually. Someone wrote the Doge tapped into that demographic on social commenting sites such as Reddit.

But it doesn't appear that has anything to do with the currency. Why do you need micro-tipping to do those comments? Is it part of the joke to insult someone by tipping them 1500 microcents.

The store-of-value ramp appears to have everything to do with speculators either buying into the HOPE delusion and/or just following (the money) on the coattails of a phenomenon.

It will always be that way because humans have emotions. And B-listers get all bent out-of-shape and can't stay on fact. I decided there is nothing I can do to stop people from getting pissed off at me. I continue to try to elide facts, share, and discuss.

If you want to join with him to try to develop a "hate AnonyMint tribe", then go ahead. Or you can wisely stay on fact.

Can we get back to the pertinent discussion here?

P.S. I already see your marketing strategy is perhaps fundamentally flawed. You are hoping to convince people here that you have a superior long-term plan. Sorry that is not what drives markets. Good luck though. And I will reserve final judgement until I read your entire document.

There is no backpedaling. It is an inability of yours to comprehend that I wrote that micro-tipping was just a(n uneconomic) gimmick and that the underlying marketing strategy was HOPE (and its various derivative memes of generosity, sense of community purpose, etc).

Duh. That is also what I am pointing out.

Of course not, you are making it obvious to every reader that your job is to spend your time making a fool of yourself by wasting everyone else's time reading about how you hate me. As if that helps anyone here. It is extremely selfish to subject all the readers here to your private vendetta against me.

So after all, we see you were just bullshitting. As usual.

Afraid to put your idea to the test of peer review and scruntiny or don't have an idea just bluffing.

State your idea about DOGE, or it didn't happen. Period.

I concur. I had the same thought actually. Micro-transactions apply when there is no better way to monetize. One example is paying someone to video chat with you and do it decentralized. If it is centralized, then no problem the site can have you load a balance and pay out of that. But then the site has to comply with FinCEN and other regs. Decentralized means you need to pay the other party on the spot. That may not necessary be "micro" value though. And it may not even require instant transaction, but probably will. And "micro" would be better in terms of being able to bill per minute.

So in general, microtransactions apply where the granularity can't be aggregated because decentralization is required. So microtransactions are a generally useful paradigm especially for our crypto aims. But for me the microtransactions as a marketing strategy to launch and do initial distribution with doesn't work due to a chicken & egg dilemma of not enough ecosystems ways to use them. And I realized from my re-familiarization with the theory of why microtransactions are often not economic, that the scenario I was thinking of for a killer ecosystem feature to drive over that chicken & egg hump wasn't going to be compelling for the users. The key challenge facing microtransactions is that no one is going to go out-of-their-way to obtain some 2 cents worth of tokens to go do some ecosystem action (no matter how compelling that ecosystem action is). The point is there isn't enough value in play for each user action. The cognitive and effort load on the user is too high.

This is what I mean by the attrition barrier.

Instead of playing hide & seek, you could just tell us your opinion. After all, it is only your opinion until you prove or convince. That is why we share here.

One might argue that users of DOGE felt a sense of participation, empowerment, and cooperation, e.g. that some programmers could chip in and create bots for micro-tipping to various social networking. In other words, that it wasn't all controlled by some core developers. Thus a sense of community purpose. Again I think this all derives from the HOPE fundamental.

The cute dog was a symbol of love and the ease of doing good, juxtaposed to the overly serious, corporatism (which is even present in Bitcoin). Again all derives from the core emotion of HOPE.

I think perhaps what you are thinking at is that DOGE was perceived as an undervalued asset relative to Bitcoin. And so you may be viewing from the "mine the speculators" marketing strategy. Again that has proven to be a P&D unsustainable strategy, except perhaps in the case of Litecoin which for various reasons has served as a hedge or alternative to Bitcoin economically (e.g. GPU miners transitioned to Litecoin when Bitcoin got ASICs).


You still apparently haven't understood that the B-lister aspect is stalking me around in every thread so you can try to attack me. It has nothing to do with whether I or you are correct on some issue. We are all free to share and argue our positions here, and in an adult manner devoid of ad hominem noise and focused on eliding the facts from our sharing.

Again I urge you to raise your contribution to the A-lister level and focus on sharing instead of throwing your toys in a temper tantrum because you don't like that I post a lot and defend my logic (until someone convinces me I am incorrect).

Instead of getting to the point, you again have succeeded in filling up another thread with drivel and flaming noise. Make your point. If your point is about me, then there is another thread specifically for that. Don't spam every thread with your off-topic jealousy about me. If you think you can be a better spokesman in the community, then go for it. Prove it. Rather B-listers just complain.

That (and the linked #135) are an example of the sort of fact focused consensus technical discussions that I love. So satisfying to see lukewagner get the point in issue #135 and throw his enthusiastic support after initially questioning the move. A distant cry from the vested interest flame wars we have in this forum.

Yeah I of course was also thinking about the 64-bit emulation barrier in Emscripten.

Thanks. Yeah I had done that research last night too:

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10320/how-useful-is-a-javascript-miner

But I think that only uses part of the CPU and I want to use all the CPU (relative electricity cost is inapplicable in my use case of unprofitable mining). I think that can maybe used in addition to a memory hard algorithm. Does WebGL always use the GPU or is there a way to detect? Any way, I will dig down into those details. I am first revisiting my 2013 work on memory hard PoW algorithms (since I can't get access to AES-NI from within the browser which is what my latter PoW hash was primarily based on and which for example Cryptonote's hash requires which is why it can't run fast in the browser).

Thanks. Yeah I had done that research last night too:

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10320/how-useful-is-a-javascript-miner

But I think that only uses part of the CPU and I want to use all the CPU (relative electricity cost is inapplicable in my use case of unprofitable mining). I think that can maybe used in addition to a memory hard algorithm. Does WebGL always use the GPU or is there a way to detect? Any way, I will dig down into those details. I am first revisiting my 2013 work on memory hard PoW algorithms (since I can't get access to AES-NI from within the browser which is what my latter PoW hash was primarily based on and which for example Cryptonote's hash requires which is why it can't run fast in the browser).

If you read the research on why micro-tipping is uneconomic for humans, you will understand that masking HOPE in the delusion of GENEROSITY (and other memes about better society) has the underlying generative essence of HOPE.

Edit: and you are certainly a prime B-lister (all elbows and acrimony) example of being deluded by HOPE and not using sober, detailed analysis.  

Edit#2: so the best marketing strategy would be the one that fostered HOPE, yet was not a delusion and could actually effect world change!

Analyzing DOGECOIN's marketing strategy:

---

---

---

---

---

Please read the last linked document in my original quote:


The mass delusion was fueled by that Ponzi scammer Alex Green and his huge tips. But he was using that marketing gimick to take more money from investors in an unsustainable scheme that declared bankruptcy.

Yeah if you give users the impression they can change the world with tipping, then they will adopt it with a passion because people really do want to believe. But the reality was it is economically impossible to change the world with micro-tipping (read the research scientists explanation such as Nick Szabo from 1996) and Alex Green took their money and made huge tips thus furthering the mass mania bubble "we can change the world". But Green was just manipulating the users and investors in an unsustainable, uneconomic delusion.

As for why it continues to have some trade on exchanges, some people still don't understand the above and still have hope that they can change their world. Thus it is reasonably possible someone can do the same scheme again and the deluded users will once again come back for sloppy seconds and hand their money over again to the scammers.

It is conceptually in terms of HOPE, no different than the delusions speculators have with handing their money over to the insiders in all the altcoin projects.

So to be clear the marketing strategy of DOGECOIN was HOPE (and even the so called marketing guru Palmer can't articule it that succinctly). And this a very powerful human emotion and can drive delusion and mass manias.

And now you will understand I am an astute marketer, as well as an out-of-the-box economist, and an expert multi-decades of experience programmer who has coded (all by myself!) and marketed software to adoption by 1% of the internet population. Not very many people have all three of those talents combined. I may not be the absolute best at any one of those, but I am in roughly on the order of the top 10% in each (maybe top 1% in some narrower facets).

What I am really good at intellectually is drilling down to the generative essence of an issue. I can find and state the succinct generative essence.

Lying to myself will lead me to failure. Therefor I am honest about the research documents I quoted which explain why micro-tipping will ALWAYS fail.


You missed the part where that also meant my planned distribution scheme is flawed. And so now I am forced to think of a way around the dilemma:



When will you learn to stop that B-lister crap that makes you look so pathetic? I advised you to lift your game up the A-lister level.

I think there is a way to read the phone's software ID number under Android but it is deprecated. And I think the user can hack this ID number.

Some telcoms employ a simmcard which for example here in the Philippines can be purchased for less than $1. Thus attainnig many phone numbers (for the same phone) is not very expensive.

You'd need some way through the telcoms to verify the unique hardware ID of the phone (the one that can be used to track the phone if it is stolen). Does WhatApp do that?

I am working on it. There are fundamental limitations (and I can't put x86 assembly code in the browser without a browser plugin that n00b users won't install thus I can't get adequate PoW hash performance for a n00b target strategy), and very difficult to think of how to overcome them.

---

No I wrote that they got the initial boost for being the first to trying micro-tipping, but that micro-tipping is fundamentally flawed as a paradigm, thus as the initial hype fades and everyone who has tried micro-tipping now realizes it is just a one-time delusion that can't be repeated.