As for a white paper, I don't mind there is no DGB specific white paper. BTC had the start, go read its white paper.
You know, that’s your decision and I respect it, even though it’s opposite my views. What’s more, and again, in spite of it being the antithesis of what I support, I respect you much more than the coward who simply tries to evade the topic or sweep it under the rug. Like the people involved in DASH who say they don’t care about the instamine, you have the right to say you don’t care about the lack of documentation. As long as everyone is informed, then everyone’s entitled to their own decision. However, just as I respect you, I think it’s only fair you respect my point of view too, don’t you? If there’s no problem with you saying you don’t care, what problem is there with me saying I do? In fact, society values those who express their concerns. I care about the lack of documentation and have been actively taking advantage of every opportunity over the last couple of years to say so and try to instigate a change for the positive. What’s the problem with that? That’s one thing that should have stayed at that.The problem is when you are intimidated, attacked and slandered for your legitimate views (and good documentation is legitimate, of course, it’s a best practice), and when it’s the Dev himself, then all the warning lights should go off. (And when it's personal character assassination, one should be duly indignant.) Is this so hard to see? I had him pull the “read the code yourself” on me last year with questions about how the individual algos reset their individual difficulty to mine settings and whether they were linked or not. I chalked it up to his own emotional limitations and not being able to handle the directness of our questions. What’s doubly concerning today is that a year has gone by and the same response was given to someone else at their first asking. There’s no emotion involved in being concerned about a pattern of behavior that continues to this day and flies in the face of all conventional wisdom regarding what it takes for a tech project to succeed. First there was astonishment on my part, then indignation, and I’ve explained this enough already. Let it be a word to the wise, and to those who just don’t get it, we can all turn the page and go on. (And no, even though these things would have been indirectly included in the offer I made to DigiByte, none of this was a material aspect.) P.S. To those of you with your hallucinogenic theories about why this happened, or what my motivations are, etc., give it a rest. It’s not that complicated. It is what it is. You can accept it or not, but not accepting it won't change what it is. And the best thing, of course, is to accept reality as it is and not try to impose what you think it should be. Did I say a word to the wise already? Never though that your opinion was to be kept to yourself or that it deserved no respect. Just offered another perspective from a long-time holder's point of view. No. And I didn't want to insinuate that was your intention. Simply wanted to use your comment as the basis for a general description of the situation to everyone here. It was not specifically directed at you, and I apologize if it came off that way. Not at all. Just a good opportunity to illustrate a healthy dichotomy for everyone to contemplate. |
|
|
|
Do you think your "innocent" posts has no influence on market? This is place, where people follow everything regarding alt.
Tell that to Jared who has spent the better part of a year trying to destroy this board and keep everything "secret" on Telegram! You tell me what I'm trying to do. At the end of the day, that's what we'll have to settle on since you will settle for nothing else but what you think. But I will tell you this: transparency and integrity are two words under my avatar that will give you a hint . . . if you really wanted to know. And no, for as important a source of information that you might think this is, one person's opinion is not going to move the market in the least. In fact, the current correction on the 15 minute chart started hours before this exchange began. Sorry. Try again. P.S. I will give you this though, the community as a whole can certainly have longer term affects on price (as Jared well knows) as well as Dev remarks can (as Jared also well knows  ). |
|
|
|
@HR,
Are you happy with, how your behaviour drives down the price?
You came up with your aggression right at times, when trades are boiling. What a coincidence! Don't say it's just that!
Let's see your flip-flop to positive side later...
Don't mix things. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other, other than coincidence. Or do you really think that little old me is that powerful? I don't share such delusional ideas. I would never, for example, tell anyone that I am so smart that I don't need to explain myself, much less think I could influence price. Is that what you thought I was doing when I was talking about buy and sell levels? Are you for real? How many like you are there here who need to go back and read and try to understand? I was very clear about sharing trading techniques in the hope of helping others to more intelligently buy. How in the world did you extract price manipulation from that? Or from what's been said here today? Get a grip man! If you want conspiracy theories and manipulation, head over to the Poloniex troll box. Edit: I've got a buy order in at somewhere between 175 and 200 BTW.  (And it's not that I'm so smart that I'm not going to explain why, rather it's because I'm fed up with this board.) |
|
|
|
As for a white paper, I don't mind there is no DGB specific white paper. BTC had the start, go read its white paper.
You know, that’s your decision and I respect it, even though it’s opposite my views. What’s more, and again, in spite of it being the antithesis of what I support, I respect you much more than the coward who simply tries to evade the topic or sweep it under the rug. Like the people involved in DASH who say they don’t care about the instamine, you have the right to say you don’t care about the lack of documentation. As long as everyone is informed, then everyone’s entitled to their own decision. However, just as I respect you, I think it’s only fair you respect my point of view too, don’t you? If there’s no problem with you saying you don’t care, what problem is there with me saying I do? In fact, society values those who express their concerns. I care about the lack of documentation and have been actively taking advantage of every opportunity over the last couple of years to say so and try to instigate a change for the positive. What’s the problem with that? That’s one thing that should have stayed at that.The problem is when you are intimidated, attacked and slandered for your legitimate views (and good documentation is legitimate, of course, it’s a best practice), and when it’s the Dev himself, then all the warning lights should go off. (And when it's personal character assassination, one should be duly indignant.) Is this so hard to see? I had him pull the “read the code yourself” on me last year with questions about how the individual algos reset their individual difficulty to mine settings and whether they were linked or not. I chalked it up to his own emotional limitations and not being able to handle the directness of our questions. What’s doubly concerning today is that a year has gone by and the same response was given to someone else at their first asking. There’s no emotion involved in being concerned about a pattern of behavior that continues to this day and flies in the face of all conventional wisdom regarding what it takes for a tech project to succeed. First there was astonishment on my part, then indignation, and I’ve explained this enough already. Let it be a word to the wise, and to those who just don’t get it, we can all turn the page and go on. (And no, even though these things would have been indirectly included in the offer I made to DigiByte, none of this was a material aspect.) P.S. To those of you with your hallucinogenic theories about why this happened, or what my motivations are, etc., give it a rest. It’s not that complicated. It is what it is. You can accept it or not, but not accepting it won't change what it is. And the best thing, of course, is to accept reality as it is and not try to impose what you think it should be. Did I say a word to the wise already? |
|
|
|
|
Now I'm going to get very serious with the community with 2 questions for you to consider and hopefully respond to.
Just to get this straight: I'm falsely accused of trying to "extort" DGB, and I have no right to be indignant?
And to top things off, in spite of my very measured reaction and carefully chosen words (in contrast with what we commonly see BTW), you're still more threatened by what I said than by the character defamation itself?
|
|
|
|
I will appreciate your analyses, regardless its positive or negative if its objective analyses. But you sound upset and I get the feeling its getting personal for you, and if thats the case, I won't be able to trust your objectivity. Plus you are contradicting yourself. First your price estimate is ridiculously high and then you give it worse odds than Las Vegas casino. I didn't like your .001 prediction or arguments you gave to back it up, and I don't like your negative analyses either. Both of them are biased, based on emotion not on logic.
Agreed, I tried bringing it up again but his backup for it was still 'anything can happen' and then gave an article to another coin rising 1000% (We'd need to hit 1000 SAT and THEN rise 1000% to get to 0.001 by the way and he had no reason to say why we'd follow suit). Your 'analysis' isn't backed up by anything real and always seems to sway wildly to the extremes (here and in other threads) and that's why people don't take kindly to your aggressive turn of face, which to your own admission comes right after the DGB devs turned down a deal you offer them  . Likewise I would hope the DGB devs can keep these matters private in the future. For the first time since the initial rise from 20 SAT I'm getting concerned, only mildly but I thought I'd add my 2 cents to the matter. In the meantime I'm seeing lots of people on twitter trying to make a case for DGB on other exchanges, keep it up guys and keep up the positive image of DGB that you all worked hard to achieve.
With your insistence over and over again for an answer that's already been given twice before now, it looks like you are bent on getting something else that you'd prefer to hear, which suggests that the emotion and lack of objectivity is coming from you.Enough miners for you to stick to 0.001 by July? Even now I still find this quite the claim.
I already answered you here: And if you'd like to get some more insight into my objectivity, please read my other posts in this thread too. Your facts are 1. Comparing it to an incomparable coin that had a big price rise at a different market cap with different tech 2. That suggests a rise nobody is questioning that, they are questioning your scale 3. So? Meaningless ratio in terms of WHY it will get there 4. Having fun isn't facts My goodness, do you realize just how much you sound like a sock puppet? Of course, you're most likely just emotionally "married" to DGB, but think about it. Your reasoning on the subject is limited to nit picking the appropriateness of a REPRESENTATIVE example, discarding as unimportant a basic premise of the coin, and finally confusing speculative possibilities with the facts they are based on. It's impossible to respond to that in any other way, and reminds me very much of certain things I've seen here before. "Having fun isn't facts". And who said it was? Come on, let's get a little more serious. |
|
|
|
. . . and that's why people don't take kindly to your aggressive turn of face, which to your own admission comes right after the DGB devs turned down a deal you offer them . . .
BTW, the offer was turned down over 2 weeks ago. Who's talking objectively based on the facts? |
|
|
|
I will appreciate your analyses, regardless its positive or negative if its objective analyses. But you sound upset and I get the feeling its getting personal for you, and if thats the case, I won't be able to trust your objectivity. Plus you are contradicting yourself. First your price estimate is ridiculously high and then you give it worse odds than Las Vegas casino. I didn't like your .001 prediction or arguments you gave to back it up, and I don't like your negative analyses either. Both of them are biased, based on emotion not on logic.
Agreed, I tried bringing it up again but his backup for it was still 'anything can happen' and then gave an article to another coin rising 1000% (We'd need to hit 1000 SAT and THEN rise 1000% to get to 0.001 by the way and he had no reason to say why we'd follow suit). Your 'analysis' isn't backed up by anything real and always seems to sway wildly to the extremes (here and in other threads) and that's why people don't take kindly to your aggressive turn of face, which to your own admission comes right after the DGB devs turned down a deal you offer them . Likewise I would hope the DGB devs can keep these matters private in the future. For the first time since the initial rise from 20 SAT I'm getting concerned, only mildly but I thought I'd add my 2 cents to the matter. In the meantime I'm seeing lots of people on twitter trying to make a case for DGB on other exchanges, keep it up guys and keep up the positive image of DGB that you all worked hard to achieve.
With your insistence over and over again for an answer that's already been given twice before now, it looks like you are bent on getting something else that you'd prefer to hear, which suggests that the emotion and lack of objectivity is coming from you.Enough miners for you to stick to 0.001 by July? Even now I still find this quite the claim.
I already answered you here: And if you'd like to get some more insight into my objectivity, please read my other posts in this thread too. |
|
|
|
Kindly settle whatever rift you have with dev personally.Thank you
At this point that is out of my hands. "Whatever rift", as you put it, that needs to be "settled" is something the Dev needs to do very PUBLICLY. The rest of what I have to say here on this board is my analysis and opinion, and has nothing to do with the Dev's libelous statement. I am capable of differentiating between and not mixing the two. Thanks for your advice though. I know it was well intentioned. |
|
|
|
Where’s the inconsistency with what I’ve written? Price speculation has nothing to do with Dev integrity, does it? All targets were met (okay, except for the .001, but I still have until July, and for those of you who still haven't read my post giving further explanation on that one, I'll just say  ). What more do you want? I mean, what more do you want for free? The next levels are buy levels, but, hey, with attitudes like what I’m seeing here, maybe I’ll just forget about posting those. Dev integrity and price speculation do meet when there are major revelations though, and today’s public accusation is one of those. Credibility falls drastically when you falsely accuse someone, more so when that someone has been a long term positive contributor, and even more so when the data is twisted, manipulated, and misrepresented. The 40 BTC, for example, was for a fully refundable escrow account upon NDA completion. What? You people don’t want to hear “negatives” even when they are true? Are you sure about that? |
|
|
|
Coming from the guy privately trying to extort 40 BTC out of us that is pretty brazen.
And that's all we get out of you? A baseless, defamatory lie? Libel? I presented you with an offer to work together: a straightforward business proposal that included proprietary analysis and trade secrets that could not be divulged without serious collaboration, which you refused. You want to refer to that as extortion? It's your prerogative to make yourself out to be a fool, so I can't stop you, but is that really what you want to do? I have clearly just called you a liar and accused you of character defamation. You can either apologize or publish the information you have (that doesn't exists, but in case it did, you could) to show that you haven't libelled me. Nice job showing who you are and confirming my thesis just presented above in such quick and succinct fashion. |
|
|
|
Glad I got back into this a while ago, this was and is my gamble coin which I hope will work out. To find all the information is a bit of a pain but after seeing all the things that are planned this could be something decent.
I has one suggestion, if a one sheeter could be put together showing where DGB started, what it has already accomplished, it's current state and future plans I think that would be a great way for new investors to easily digest DGB, it would also make it easier for people to share.
I know there is a roadmap but something pretty and straight to the point would be great.
tiggytomb, That has been asked for, and requested for years, with no result other than the implicit: the dev simply refuses to do it for whatever the reason. Is it incapability? Laziness? Aloofness? Stupidity? Who knows? The point is that the reason why is not important. The only thing that is important for real investors' decision making is the fact that clear and thorough documentation is systematically refused by the dev. By the way, I've been telling this to Jared both publicly and privately for the better part of two years now, and there's been no change. If anything, there's been a circling of wagons on his part with increasing obstinacy and further entrenchment refusing to take direction from others and surrounding himself with very dubious advisors to say the least. You're right to say that it's a gamble, but I think you've got better odds in Vegas . . . where, even though the work against you, the rules are at least clearly stated. There’s always the hope that things will change, but, as time goes by, that hope obviously dwindles in an ever accelerated manner. Hope this helps not only you, but also everyone to better evaluate DGB's real prospects. HR |
|
|
|
Would you mind further articulating those plans, or is that just a nice phrase you've just pulled out of the hat? Sure is a "trending topic" these days, meaning that there wasn't much thought that needed to go into it.  |
|
|
|
Can someone point me to a link to the whitepaper for this coin? I found some posts talking about doing one a long time ago but can't seem to find one. Bumping this again for a dev that's on the team. Must say though that hearing people talking about how they've invested for years because of the tech, without a whitepaper that can be peer reviewed etc, is "interesting' to say the least. Peer reviewing a whitepaper is like dating your sister's friend. It never turns out quite like you expected it to. Plus everyone has a whitepaper...and a sister. The genius is in the code. The actual code is the proof. Review it here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyteThat's a good way of ensuring that the majority of people take their business somewhere else. Could you imagine an engineer telling you to take the motor apart? Or a chemist telling you to look at the lab samples? If "the genius is in the code", what does that say about the guy who says he wrote it but can't explain it? Sorry about the tough "love", but this response of yours is beyond belief. |
|
|
|
We'll keep this close at hand for reposting when people are asking why LTC is trading at $400 USD.  |
|
|
|
Enough miners for you to stick to 0.001 by July? Even now I still find this quite the claim.
I already answered you here: And if you'd like to get some more insight into my objectivity, please read my other posts in this thread too. |
|
|
|
There are 10 times as many miners on DGB than there were just 2 weeks ago. 5 times as many as 2 days ago! DGB is in the spotlight. Next up, a CoinDesk article. |
|
|
|
Can someone point me to a link to the whitepaper for this coin? I found some posts talking about doing one a long time ago but can't seem to find one.
Unfortunately, good documentation is not one of DigiByte's strong points, and most likely is one of the reasons why it has lagged so badly in the past. As far as I know, there is no whitepaper for any of the DigiByte technologies, nor a roadmap for the future. The not so pretty truth is that on top of that lack of good documentation, often times things are quite buggy and work poorly. Hopefully things are changing for the better though. Good question to ask in search of some basic facts and whose honest answer might well serve as a reality check at this euphoric time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
