Once I get my testnet up, I'll try my hand at compiling a wallet for Mac OSX, though I would greatly prefer someone with more experience and time taking on that issue. We really could use a Mac dev all the way around for future releases as well.

In the spirit of crypto, I'd rather take donations in CAT or BTC, if at all. I'm not doing this to make money from the community. But donations would be greatly appreciated if you feel it's a worth cause.

It isn't yet. The simple fact is the 1 block 36 method results is a cyclical formula, unless we tweak it somehow. Etbluv1's LLACCA suggestion is good, but I think it may be overly complex and frankly I'm not crazy about screwing with block rewards to screw over pool hoppers, at the expense of loyal miners. There are other headaches involved too which I can detail in a bit if there is interest. THere are also benefits which Etbluv1 can explain himself.

I'm about to order a VPS with my own funds to allow us to build a proper testnet, because I don't really want that testnet on my private network for a number of reasons. I should have that built by the end of the night barring any  unforeseen issues or consequences. Today has been pretty low key for me, I personally was very busy at work (I unboxed and imaged 36 laptops today and did a number of other things) so I didn't really have a chance to look at the test net until now. I'll let you guys know how it goes.

Can you give me your wallet address so I can look it up and see what's going on?

Thanks

Kuroman, the channel is not private, all are welcome there. We use it because the forums are somewhat clumsy for brainstorming. They aren't really conducive to real time conversation. We make a point of posting completed ideas to the forums for review. Please join us using kiwiirc or something if you like. We're most definitely trying to be as transparent as possible.

Very well.

Right now I have 13 people in our dev channel Including Cinnamon_catcoin, dogles, hozer, nebajoth, NyanCat, zerodrama, etblbu1, JRWR, Myself, new_shibe, raistlinthewiz, Sir_Knee_grow, and skillface. we're in the process of discussing a few issues, the recently discovered chinese catcoin, which by all accounts looks irrelevant.

Etblvu1, who has recently joined us and most of the others are discussing what to do about the diff oscillations. We have been working on this for the past several days. A number of ideas have come forward all of which to my knowledge has been put in front of the community in this thread. Ihave been and always will be in favor of a community vetted approach that's released preferably through KR105's original fork. I apologize if my messaging has been unclear as, this thread has been somewhat dynamic today and hard to follow. It's very difficult for comments to appear in the right order when people edit their posts in great length after the fact.

With regards to Hozer's fork, and what's happening there, and my personal position on it let me calrify a few things so there is no misunderstandings:

1. I do not personally agree with his approach, what was done was a little hot headed and perhaps did not really contribnute to the direction the community wanted to go, he did this on his own and against the boards wishes.
2. Hozer's fork is his way of stating frustration that the community can not reach at least a consensus of what needs to be done if anything. What maybe people are not realizing here is the original Catcoin does not appear to have a working testnet, so Hozer deployed a fork that is largely designed as a test environment. Unless it recieves majority hash it will NEVER be the live fork, and people misconstrued that as a 51% hostile. It's not.
3. Hozer said he was going to contact the exchanges...blah blah blah. He did say that, he also did say that when the network hash reached 5 MHash he'd just fork the coin, he was clearly frustrated that people would rather watch this coin die than act and intervene. He's on our team, he and I and the rest of us all want this coin to succeed, how it was approached, by hozer's own admission was less than ideal, and perhaps over the top.
4. The number he is asking you to enter is not to launch his fork, its to actually get some valid input rather than all this bush beating we've been doing up to this point. He's simply trying to make people commit to the thought of change rather than just saying no to all his ideas and not offering up any alternatives. I agree with that this might not be the best method, but at least he's trying to get suggestions
5. Once again his actions were his alone, and he'll be the first person to tell you that.

My position is as follows:

I am an investor in cat, I have 7500 Catcoins that are largely worthless in their current state.  I have been mining this coin since day 1. I am interested in this coin being a long term investment, and I am willing to contribute in whatever level is necessary to correct that. My current interest is to build a motivated team that is capable technically, socially and financially that effectively represents the most active members of our community. I feel that this coin is best run by a consensus of the most invested stakeholders, including you. I believe we need to tweak this coin in a levelheaded, well thought out approach to make the coin viable as a long term investment for others and to slowly build the Catcoin brand to be one of the most dominant coins on the internet. I see this coin outliving dogecoin (as cats often do), and ultimately being an alternate currency to litecoin and bitcoin directly. I think this coin has incredible potential and I am willing to go to whatever means is necessary to further that vision.

I did get frustrated earlier, and honestly I don't need some of the stress in my life that this coin provides. I was trying to defend hozer earlier, yes, because people weren't really understanding what was happening. I don't agree with the method he chose and from all of us at the board it didn't really reflect the direction we want to go. I didn't believe personally that he should have been crucified though so I tried to defend what he was trying to accomplish without alienating yet more valuable members of our dwindling community.

My real name is Kevin McCurdy, I am a network engineer by trade and I believe catcoin has the power to go great places. I am an avid gamer, and have been quite addicted to mining for several months now. I do not wish to hide behind a shroud of anonymity, because I believe this coin needs a face to lead it, not some anonymous handle on the internet. I believe it's going to take determination, and hard work and perserverance to get where we all want this coin to be.

I hope that answers your questions. I'd be happy to chat with you in IRC or via PM if you'd like. Believe me, I am not the enemy here, I am trying to help take this coin places KR105 never dreamed it could go, with him or without is irrelevant. This community is probably the strongest of any coin I've seen yet, and I firmly believe this coin will go places if we act soon and together.

Hope that helps  

Warm Regards,

KM

SlimePuppy, what part of this are you not understanding? He's not ramming a fork through, he wants us to come to a consensus on what should be done. I think we've reached a consensus that another fork needs to happen, to what end and at what time are details yet to be determined. Pretty much everyone in this thread has agreed the diff oscillations are something that needs to be fixed, if you don't see that by looking at this graph: http://catcoins.biz/charts/ then you should really move along to another coin. Stop this bullshit, it's not productive.

No Kuro, the two channels exist exclusively for a reason. It's actually not #catcoin that is the main channel, it is ##catcoin, and has been since launch. Secondly, #catcoin-dev allows us a place to bash our heads together without boring people who aren't interested to death. It is not meant to obscure anything. neither of the channels are locked and they are both open to anyone at any time. #catcoin-dev was the channel that was made when the board was created. We want to add more people to that. There is nothing nefarious going on in there at all, just discussion on how to fix this coin.


Did you even read what he wrote? At all? He built the code for me for a a 1 block retarget, 36 block average that I have been talking about for like four days. That code specifically isn't some savage terrorist attack on our coin, it is what I personally asked him to create so we could test it. If you read back over the past ten pages you'll see I suggested this solution many many times. Nobody has yet said no at all to 1 block 36 average yet, that I've seen, because we're still simulating it. But the code is built for testing when we get there. Hozer's fork is completely seperate from that. Chill out. Lets work together, I think hozer has made it reasonably clear he isn't the enemy and isn't actually going to contact any exchanges or try to 51% the coin.

My personal vote so far is still the 1 block 36 average method, HOWEVER, etbluv1 has just made a reasonable suggestion in IRC that we're going to need to sim out. He already posted it here a few posts up.

To be honest that's what we really want. Different viewpoints. With that we might all agree to a system that uniquely solves our issues and once again unites our community.

Can we just stop for a minute? Please? For the sake of the coin that many of us have invested hundreds or thousands of dollars into? Here's a list of the things we need to do to take this coin forward so it can continue. I'm open to more suggestions, but we really really really need to get back onto the productive conversation we were having before everybody got preoccupied.

1. We need to hear suggestions and develop those ideas into pseudo-code to see if they're viable
2. We need to simulate the suggestions in a simulator and see if they exhibit acceptable behavior, or at the very least the least destructive behavior.
3. We need to actually code the proposed fix
4. We need to actually test the code somehow to ensure it works and we need miners to commit to losing a small ammount of hash for a few hours in order to confirm this will actually fix the problem this time.
5. We need to verify the code as a community and vote that this is the method we wish to take going forward.
6. We need to announce the fork to the community and get some buzz going
7. We need to notify the exchanges and pools of the incoming fork
8. We need to execute the fork and monitor it to prevent 51% attacks and mitigate them if they happen. This may include a large % of people switching to p2pool for 48 hours to establish the new fork as correct.

I see this taking at least 10 days, and right now I feel like we're at step -12. Lets get this conversation moving int he right direction to execute these steps IN ORDER and get this coin back on the right track. I personally commit 2MH to testing hash for a period of up to 48 hours. We need more people to do the same. IF anyone disagrees with this method, please post here and state why. If I missed steps post here and state what I missed. I've had enough of this banter, we need to get on the right track. Look how active our community is! that should tell you all you need to know about the interest in Catcoin, now lets work together and actually fix it. We have some incredibly smart and talented people here, rather than wasting it, lets work together.


We already have part of that group created. I've asked Nullu to join that group and I'm interested in more nominations. I personally would like to see skillface, kisa2005, kalus, kuroman, etbluv1, and strelok369 join this group. Anybody who wishes to PRODUCTIVELY discuss these changes is welcome to join #catcoin-dev on freenode (including the people I just mentioned). That is where the majority of the stakeholders I mentioned in a previous post are lodged. We want more community representation on this team, ASAP. So consider this your invitation to be a part of the future of Catcoin. All of you have stake in it, we need more like minded people in this channel. If anyone has issues with IRC PM me and I'll help you get setup.

FUCKING THIS.

Guys, I'm not sure if you can tell my stress level or not by how I write, but I'm so close to just saying "fuck it", you have no idea. I'm trying to help bring this community together, it's not seeming to do one single bit of good because we've spent all afternoon arguing about hozer. When you guys are ready to start dealing with the real issues with this coin, let me know. This is stressing me out too much right now.

I'm not sure what else you really expected. Hozer seems to think we can fork this every week. I completely disagree, but I do think another fork is necessary to try and correct the difficulty oscillations that are present. In terms of the last fork, it was way way less fucked up than it could have been. I agree all forks are a huge risk, but to be honest with you, if we didn't do it, this coin would be dead right now. Dead. So I say that the coin being alive right now is a testament to the fact that we have a strong community and that it wasn't a total failure.

DO you not agree that there is an issue we need to fix if this coin is to survive? We're bleeding hash rate because the diff is too unreliable.

Great, you got rid of your coins. You have no further interest in this thread. Congratulations. Now shut the fuck up and let us try to fix this, you're not adding anything to this discussion.




Yeah it nearly died because some idiot sent an mass email with only one pool on it  and it (the pool) got 51% as a result. We also caught and corrected that before it was a disaster. THe last fork was FLAWLESS except for that. THe exchanges were all prepped before the fork. Saying we have collective amnesia about it is an outright lie.

Also, I'm still not sure if people are having reading comprehension issues or what, but let me stress this again.

HOZER'S FORK IS NOT VALID OR THE WILL OF THE COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW. HE IS OFFERING AN ALTERNATIVE. FROM HIS POSITION IF THE MAJORITY OF THE NETWORK JOIN HIS FORK, THEN THE COMMUNITY DECIDED. PLEASE STOP ACTING LIKE HOZER IS THE DEV OF THIS COIN AND REPRESENTS EVERYBODY. HE DOESN'T.

I'm not sure how else to get this point across. The board isn't ramming anything anywhere, we want a consensus on what to do next to correct the serious oscillations we're seeing in diff. we've had some good ideas and we're still in the simulate/data collection process. Waiting for more ideas and possible solutions.

I'm not sure what part of this you're not understanding. This isn't our fork, the board or KR105 didn't authorize this, nor did we get a consensus from the community on it. Why? Because we didn't have anything to do with it. These are the actions of 1 community member providing an alternative. I can't tell him to take the code down, because I have no authority to. You could do this with any coin, clone the git repo and call it a fork. THe only way it actually becomes a fork is if people largely adopt it.

I've spoken with hozer about his weekly updates being a bad idea, but in this case he seems to want to do his own thing. He is providing assistance to Catcoins board, but these actions with the alternate fork are his and his alone. I have messaged KR105 to see if he will do another fork for us and we really need to get that done. Please people, don't let the actions of one person out to be more than it is. Stop focusing on this and focus on fixing this coin.

Upon review that was an entirely different scenario. That was a direct and deliberate attack on the coin.  "The board" isn't talking about 51%ing anything, we want the community to reach a consensus on this coin and how to fix it ASAP, so we can begin implementing this fix. The hash rate is in free fall, we must do something relatively quickly or we're soon going to be on the list of dead coins. These are not threats at all, just facts. We're wasting time talking about hozer's fork, because unless someone dropped 200 MHash on it, it will not be official. I'm sure we're not the only coin with a cloned git repo.

SO, will the 1 block 36 average method satisfy members of the community to fix the diff jumps for the short-medium term? If we added a max 20% jump per re-target, would that alleviate more concerns? Is there another solution you'd rather see? What are we going to do immediately to save this coin? You know what my vote is, and most members of the board agree with me, however, we will not put through a change with out the large acceptance of the community. So lets start accepting or suggesting! Lets get this party started.

Great. For now, Hozer's fork is an alternative, if people decide this is the direction they want for catcoin, it's not the official fork, and is unlikely to be unless many people reach consensus and join it. Any coin can have this done to it. Unless it's adopted by the masses, it's irrelevant.

How about we reach a consensus on what we're actually going to do and actually execute it. Hozer's fork is not official, and does not represent the board, but it is an alternative. You guys are arguing about a non-issue. Anybody can clone a git repo for any coin and do exactly what hozer is doing, unless it gets major hash rate it's not happening. For now that gives us a valuable test bed, and an opportunity to actually come to a solution as a community and decide what direction we want this coin to go. Currently only etblvu1 has posted alternatives to my knowledge, and frankly short term I'm not sure they're viable, if I see proof to the contrary it may yet get my vote. My 1 block 36 average is still my first choice personally. That choice does not represent the community or board as a whole. What is the best option? What is simple and relatively safe from abuse that solves our current diff issues? I'm looking for more suggestions, or approval of one of the current options. This coin is dead in 10 days if we do nothing, which seems to be the current course of action, because the nethash is dropping with every diff cycle. Lets get a solution adopted and coded, so we can save this coin. We currently have a measly 44 MHash. Our time is ticking, lets get this done.

You mistake me. I'm not opposed to change. I want that change to not leave unanswered questions for miners. I don't ant it to be guess work as to what the block rewards is going to be. IMHO, variable block rewards are a fundamental change to how this coin operates. I also wish the algorithm to be simple and near impossible to abuse. I'm not sure your solutions satisfies all those conditions currently. If I can see proof that it does, I personally am more likely to be on board. how can we test and verify this?

This would be a disaster to code IMO, open to abuse and doesn't really solve the problem. If people don't vote or can't vote for whatever reason, everyone else gets screwed.


I don't believe we can do a "variable reward system" without fundamentally changing the coin, causing us to lose a lot of the support that we have left. I'm personally looking for reliable predictable output from a coin not "it could be anywhere between 25 and 50 coins". That's not predictable, and from what I've learned of the mining community people want simple easy to understand coins.

I still have not yet to see any reason why 1 block 36 avg will NOT work. I also see discussion in the main alt coin forums that "smart devs will choose to have a 1 block retarget". So why is this not going to work? Why make it more complicated then it needs to be? The algorithm is simple and easy to understand. It's also quick to implement. I'm open to alternate suggestions, but I have not seen a simpler one yet.

In some ways, our low trade volume runs the risk of us getting de-listed anyways. As hozer said, being de-listed is not a death knell, having no netowrk hash is. We need to either use the presented solution or come up with a better on as soon as reasonably possible, code it, publish it and get the pools and exchanges on board with the fork. Does anyone see any issues with the logic we're talking about here? DOes my graph have any flaws that we should know about?

It would be pretty easy to add a 50% limiter to prevent 400% increases up and down, but using an average of 36 or whatever number we decide on will not likely ever see that drastic of a change. We can implement it just to be sure.  In what way does 1 block 36 Avg not solve the issues we have right now? It's self limiting, accurate, quick and very flexible. I'm open to suggestions otherwise here.

Etblvu1, no offense, but Galaxy coin is a really shitty example for a number of reasons:

1. It has a 30 second block time, we're at 10 minutes, that's outright apples to oranges.
2. They used average of previous 10 blocks only, meaning their coin loses its "memory" too quickly. Their coin forgets its history hash rate after just 5 minutes. Ours adapts over the course of 6 hours, but much quicker with drastic spikes in either direction because the average will be affected greatly, and block times will be much shorter or longer than anticipated.

Comparing this solution in galaxy and cat is two completely different kitties. They could have fixed it by taking previous 150 or 200 block average. Or using 5 block retarget with 50 block average, or something similar. THey just don't take enough history into account, which I guarantee causes the crazy oscillations in their coin.