Great stuff, thanks for the info. Looks like CLAMs are indeed becoming more widely used.

I'm spending 100s on infrastructure -- domain names, seed nodes, web hosting will come back, etc. More may be spent on other things in time. No problem with any of that that. The problem is that domain names are just one small component of a public presence and can consume almost arbitrary amounts of money, given various character code combinations, alternate spellings, word combos (for example we are using aeoncoin in some places), different TLDs, etc. There are also some proposals that have been made for complete different names, and we have some domains for those too. It is potentially endless.

I'm just counting popular sites. Maybe I'm wrong about those other ones. If they're also popular that would be interesting to know.

The problem is there are just a million different "almost" variations like this and I don't want to sign up for a big budget of domain fees on a portfolio of names that might or might not be useful.

æon.info is a bit more promising though, maybe that is worth registering. Not sure.

I did go ahead and get æon.info at the bargain price of $4/year instead of the usual $10. Some of the others are $30 or perhaps more. Too much with so many combinations out there.

Nice!

Edited above:

The charts here are more interesting: http://coin.dance/charts

Russia, yes, but also USA and some others.

IMO the feature that is most needed is viewing posts in chronological order yet being able to jump to current posts without scrolling all the way down every time. Maybe a way to start viewing the thread from the bottom and then offering infinite scroll up instead of down would suffice.

Sort by newest gives a way to see current posts without scrolling but requires reading the thread of discussion backwards.

There is no such forum rule. The rule was quoted above: "obviously false nonsense"

If forum mods don't want to get involved in judging opinions and scams, do you really think they want to try take into account all the other posts from a user and infer agenda and intent to piss off people, which is largely subjective anyway? I guess it is possible but I seriously doubt it.

We both well know that not all -- as in 100% -- of his 229 posts are not out of line. I posted specific posts that are clearly not out of line. For example, expressing an opinion on predicted price action. If that is out of line then the lead developer of the coin doing the same thing is also out of line (in fact neither is).

It is important if you have a valid point to support that point with specific evidence.


I quoted specific examples of the account in question having expressed substantive opinions the coin rather than merely nonsense, inflammatory personal attacks, or other actual trolling. That is relevant to your claim that his posts are trolling. The truth or accuracy of his opinions is irrelevant.

That directly refutes your suggestion that all 229 of his posts are trolling. The posts I cited were on different subtopics as well, including price action and the coin having been instamined, so they don't appear to be the exact same content being repeatedly post on a thread in a disruptive thread bombing manner. Though if you have examples of the latter you could post them.

I also quoted some posts which may well constitute trolling and could be reported as such. They're not his entire 229 post history though.


Opinions on a coin whether positive or negative, along with the accuracy thereof, are all explicitly not moderated. It doesn't matter whether a lot of people have worked on it or not, nor whether the project has a good or bad name. The moderators don't get involved in that at all.


If you want to claim that the account in question is posting obviously false nonsense (note the emphasis which is mprep's not mine) and that is not constructive opinion, info, or something else substantial that isn't off topic, then you are going to have to quote it specifically and document it as such.

Some people have signatures that are interesting and worth seeing. What I'd like is the ability to disable signature by individual account.

Bump in case anyone is interested.

I'm currently staking CLAMs every day on the pool so you will get consistent income by joining it.

His qualifier could be interpreted as perhaps saying he does't support it. He's saying he supports some magic fairy dust version of it, not any actual implementation, which will always have tradeoffs.

I never expected the actual limit to be hit and maybe not even close to it. People don't necessarily keep spent private keys around. But I certainly always expected a hell of a lot more than the current 1/2 million to be dug up. At least a few million if not eventually 10 million or more.

I agree with you that the more that are dug up now the fewer will be dug up later. I also think that the market got ahead of itself valuing CLAMs at >1 USD. That would make CLAMs a top 10 coin based on its likely supply and that doesn't make sense for a fork coin with some tweaks (even if the tweaks are generally meritorious) that it is used at exactly one web site two web sites.

Supply being dug up in response to price increases is exactly what is supposed to happen with this coin. Anyone who claims otherwise didn't understand the design

EDIT: Right after I posted, directbet announced support, so two web sites now!

Please don't misquote. I didn't say that every single thing about his behavior is okay. I just suggested you should be more specific in terms reporting of actual posts. Rather than claiming "he's a professional troll" (paraphrasing perhaps) which you can't prove (in these sense of professional = paid) and probably isn't true.


Dozens may be overkill but you should cite specifics if you have them. As I demonstrated with quite a few posts all from the very first page of his history list (I didn't look any further than that), many of his posts are opinions and on-topic discussion and are not trolling. I also cited some posts that seem questionable to me.


That is entirely off topic for Meta. Please refrain. The truth or untruth of posts (including scamming and accusations of scamming) is explicitly not moderated.


Also off topic for Meta unless you can cite specific violations of forum rules. Competition and criticism between coins and otherwise is not moderated.

He's still active in discussions including MRL's crypto stuff (he talked a lot with Shen about ringct right before the paper draft was released) but hasn't done much with the code recently. He's apparently quite busy with his other activities I gather.

Rb2. It doesn't seem to be a great move but at least the rook is out of danger there :/

If you look at the commits you can see that moneromoo has been the most active recently. Before that there are a bunch of commits from  warptangent and the megacommit from NoodleDoodle.  On the development branch most of moneromooo's commits are duplicated, and there are also commit from twinget (cleanup and documentation projects), Shen (crypto) and various others  (roman, oranjuice, rostislav).

You can also see all of fluffypony's merge commit, which are mostly automatic, but he reviews them and sometimes there are issues, discussion, and sometime revisions needed before the actual merge.

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits/master
https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits/development

Those are just the commits on the main project on the main repo. Other work either hasn't been committed to the main repo on the main project yet or is not part of the core applications. For example luigi developed the standalone transaction proof tool but that isn't on the main repo, Shen has done some work on mininero (python implementation of Monero's crypto) that is on his own repo (there is a project on the project repo, but I don't Shen's latest stuff has been merged to it yet), and I think NoodleDoodle is working on a few things too. I did the code changes for the block time change, which aren't committed yet. There are others in progress I'm sure.

First of all there is certainly no FUD when the posts are clearly factual as the one I quoted was.

I'm not saying I like their style and you know that while I'm also critical of Dash at times, I don't express it in the same manner, but I also don't believe that critical posts are inherently trolling. To allow that argument means that any coin can shut down legitimate criticism by reporting it as trolling, and the rules already state that scams and accusations of scamming are explicitly not moderated.

Some of the particular posts may be. If you can pick out particular posts that go beyond criticism to to trolling then point them out. I pointed out one post from the top of that poster's history that was clearly factual, critical and not trolling in my opinion, but you may disagree of course.

As far as a the number of posts, I think you have to consider the popularity and overall level of discussion of the coin generally. A high profile coin with 5000 pages of activity may get a lot more criticism, legitimately, than a smaller one. But bombing the thread and useless frequent bumps is not okay either. If there is stuff too-frequently being posted without new on-topic content then that is a valid complaint. Point it out, specifically.


Maybe there was a ban? I know other people (Spoetnik?) have gotten temporary bans for trolling.


Likewise.

EDIT: Again, here are a few more posts all from the very first page of TheDasher's history. I don't see how these different in any significant way from the price speculation, discussion, and opinion (which is explicitly not moderated) that is common on that thread by supporters (the lead developer even posted technical analysis price charts and a bullish trading outlook a while ago):




Here are a few posts that express an opinion. They appear to be original comments, not repetitive posts:



On the other hand there are some posts that may well be trolling. This one I don't understand the image (not quoting the big image here):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg12819872#msg12819872

These I'm not sure about. They are opinion, but clearly hostile and perhaps intended to evoke a negative emotional response:

The developers can be seen as having an indirect incentive derived from the donation fund.

The intent is that the donation fund support the project which includes incentives for developers. This is consistent with the wishes of those who made a statement when donating (including some very large donations), though there are also many anonymous donations with no stated wishes.

Obviously at the point most of the donations were made, they were worth next to nothing and spending it on just about anything would just cause the entire fund to evaporate.

So the following plan was made, and described in various posts on the thread, but collected and clarified here:

1. HODL, distribute small bounties
2. Reimburse direct project expenses (seed nodes, web hosting, etc.). Currently paid by lead developer.
3. Compensation for core developers and potentially larger bounties for external projects
4. Distributions to core team allocated by responsibility and subject to a vesting policy of at least one year (policy applied to all including lead developer)

We are currently in stage 1. The transitions to stage 2, 3, and 4 will occur in sequence based on a subjective evaluation of whether the fund can handle those roles without being unduly depleted, which in turn is largely a function of value (but also to some extent, probably lesser now and greater later, the rate new donations are received).

Two indirect consequences of this plan:

1. If the value increases sufficiently, then the core team will upon vesting receive a significant amount of coin as we reach 4 without the fund having been depleted.

2. If I leave the project prior to vesting as described in #4 having occurred, the donation fund will be passed on to a replacement lead or if there is no continuation of the organized effort to develop the coin, it will be burned.


The donation address is in the ANN OP. All donations are welcome. The daemon miner supports a --donate option which automatically directs mined coins to donations so you can simultaneously support the network and the project (--mining-threads is also needed if you want >1 thread)

I suspect that nothing we do now would be first. Pretty much everything has been tried.

I don't really know how to measure real usage given that sham usage can be created. I guess observed usage is always a bound on actual usage but not at all a tight bound.