Hi, sounds like a very worthwhile project. Please post the charities you know about here in the OP and keep updating it! You could also have a link to this thread in your sig  |
|
|
|
|
Uhhh... ok.
If you were here in the beginning you'll know the term alt came about once other coins started appearing (Ixcoin, I0coin etc etc)
Thing is, sure there is innovation in some of the new coins, but MOST of the time.. it is "just another alt shit clone"
Feel free to get off you pedestal anytime now.. not sure who your target audience is with this post.. believe it or not there are people here that are much smarter than you...
|
|
|
|
I finally got 1000 coins hot on the grill steakin...
 Good work QBK team.. awesome seeing the price hovering around initial ICO levels! |
|
|
|
No-cap/Cap voting is closer than I expected it to be at this point. Although it is a small sample size.
I'm just wondering what benefit is there to not having a cap? Curious if anyone who voted for the first option would mention why they chose to give exchanges a percentage of the payouts?
I voted for option no 3 and am thinking to be fair to the POLO mods of just giving them a little bounty bag every month as a giveaway for their hard work which would come from the giveaway section. But assuming the coin gets on Bittrex too, or other exchanges, do you plan to give their mods a giveaway every month as well? It's like giving gifts to kids... how can you give one kid a gift and not expect the others to put their hand out too? I'd think a bounty for this month only, due to running the ICO and such, would make sense. I'm not sure why they should get bounties every month though. Voting-wise, I obviously voted for number 3. I am just curious if I overlooked some benefit to not having a cap. Perhaps some folks vote randomly or don't realize by choosing the first option they will actually get less in the way of payouts. It's sort of rare for people to vote themselves less money. I see your point.. although there is still a lot of middle ground and I expect the devs will take everything into consideration before making their final decision, regardless of the poll |
|
|
|
I don't see why we should discriminate against mega whales. If someone wants that many coins why should they be penalised? They had to buy them, right? So mega whales should also get the fair reward..
Well... on one hand, you are right. They bought the coins, so they should get a fair reward. But, how do we differentiate between an exchange or megawhale? An exchange could just break off a chunk of their holdings and claim they are a regular investor, wanting their 15% of total rewards. It'd also benefit the coin more if there were less megawhales too, as generally you don't want one person holding too many coins. They become a sword hanging over everyone's heads. You are absolutely right on both points.. however as you say there's no real way to stop anyone from splitting up the coins. So may as well keep it percentage based across the board. |
|
|
|
Good idea.. Well whales will have to register in Bagholder area with only one address to be paid and yes exchanges earn from the trades so makes sense. Let's put the vote up and see what happens..
Yeah, but what I was saying is... say MegaWhale has 15% of the entire supply... he's a big fat whale. He then breaks up that 15% into three wallets of 5% each. He registers on your dividend signup page as three different people, at 5% each, and wants payment to three different btc wallets. What's to stop him or an exchange from doing so? I don't see why we should discriminate against mega whales. If someone wants that many coins why should they be penalised? They had to buy them, right? So mega whales should also get the fair reward.. |
|
|
|
BAGHOLDER BONUS VOTE IS UP..PLEASE PARTICIPATE..  Trying to vote, it's not allowing me.. possibly because i voted in the previous poll? |
|
|
|
|
If this thread has succeeded at anything it's by bringing more attention to Autumn's murder.
|
|
|
|
I can appreciate how QBK would be the easiest way to go, but i would also love the option of BTC of course. But that would mean exposing yourselves to scammers cheaters hackers etc. What if BTC option was available to 1000 QBK+ holders or something along those lines. Also, what is your criteria for asset purchases? Could use a mix of these assets for exposure to mining operations & such: https://www.havelockinvestments.com |
|
|
|
I actually thought you guys knew what you were doing after reading silverking's post... now i'm not so sure
Adam, I'm sorry if it seems a bit like we are herding cats in here. If we discuss a lot of 'what ifs' and possible options and scenarios in here, it is out of a desire for transparency. I can see how it may make us look like we have no concrete direction, though. I promise you, that is not the case. QiBuck is unique in many ways and one of those ways is that there is no "head guy" on the team. We all have a voice - and the QBK community does as well. So yes, there will be lots of ideas batted around and some may be contrary to others, and there may even be some squabbling from time to time, but it's all just part of the brainstorming process. We could keep it private if the community prefers, but personally, I relish the fact that by having you guys know what our thoughts and ideas are that it keeps us on our toes. Cheers, Cynthia I appreciate your reply! |
|
|
|
|
I actually thought you guys knew what you were doing after reading silverking's post... now i'm not so sure
|
|
|
|
|
It seemed as though the burning of coins issue was settled for a while there with silverking's post, now it seems to be back on the table.
it is very discouraging to see a lack of unity within the dev team, and such a bad idea getting this much traction
|
|
|
|
This conversation is ridiculous. 2 million coins is already too low for an all around coin (although not for an investment/dividend coin). They priced the ICO a bit high (or more than a bit) and it didn't work. That is all. The whole point of the coin is to take the ICO money and invest in profitable Bitcoin (and alts) projects. If they are successful at that, this could be a huge hit. If not, then it's just another coin.
But, to now take half of the investment dollars and use it to buy back the coins is nonsensical. Unless, and this is a big unless, they simply don't know what they are doing and/or they are dishonest. Otherwise, buying back the coins gives a short term boost to the coin and less money for investment (with less room for error). That is obviously nice for the immediate future and for people who want to sell as quickly as possible, but then we are all left with a coin that has less chance at success.
The only thing nonsensical here is your post. Did you bother to actually read the plan or did you just skim it? Using 25% of the funds to buy back 50% of the coins will increase our ROI by 50%. If you can't understand that then I can't help you. Will you please just leave it alone? Burning coins is a stupid idea. It was always a stupid idea and it will always be a stupid idea. Your logical mathematical theories do not apply to real life where there are many variables.. Stop trying to get the dev team to waste 25 BTC. Are you secretly trying to hurt this coin? 2 million is not a huge number of coins. I am buying the coins under 10k sats. Half the posts in the 40 page thread are you trying to convince everyone to get on board with your flawed reasoning. Respectfully please leave it the fuck alone. Another senseless fool. This thread seems to have more than most. Aggressive ignorance at it's finest. And FYI- I own more than 10k and I'm just trying to help. And oh, gfy. Hmmm, aggressive arrogance at it's finest. Please show an example where buying and burning, or where a huge buy wall, has ever helped a coin for more than a few days. Seriously, please educate me wise one. *crickets* |
|
|
|
This conversation is ridiculous. 2 million coins is already too low for an all around coin (although not for an investment/dividend coin). They priced the ICO a bit high (or more than a bit) and it didn't work. That is all. The whole point of the coin is to take the ICO money and invest in profitable Bitcoin (and alts) projects. If they are successful at that, this could be a huge hit. If not, then it's just another coin.
But, to now take half of the investment dollars and use it to buy back the coins is nonsensical. Unless, and this is a big unless, they simply don't know what they are doing and/or they are dishonest. Otherwise, buying back the coins gives a short term boost to the coin and less money for investment (with less room for error). That is obviously nice for the immediate future and for people who want to sell as quickly as possible, but then we are all left with a coin that has less chance at success.
The only thing nonsensical here is your post. Did you bother to actually read the plan or did you just skim it? Using 25% of the funds to buy back 50% of the coins will increase our ROI by 50%. If you can't understand that then I can't help you. Will you please just leave it alone? Burning coins is a stupid idea. It was always a stupid idea and it will always be a stupid idea. Your logical mathematical theories do not apply to real life where there are many variables.. Stop trying to get the dev team to waste 25 BTC. Are you secretly trying to hurt this coin? 2 million is not a huge number of coins. I am buying the coins under 10k sats. Half the posts in the 40 page thread are you trying to convince everyone to get on board with your flawed reasoning. Respectfully please leave it the fuck alone. Another senseless fool. This thread seems to have more than most. Aggressive ignorance at it's finest. And FYI- I own more than 10k and I'm just trying to help. And oh, gfy. NOTED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. It's still a waste of 25 BTC no matter how you slice it. |
|
|
|
This conversation is ridiculous. 2 million coins is already too low for an all around coin (although not for an investment/dividend coin). They priced the ICO a bit high (or more than a bit) and it didn't work. That is all. The whole point of the coin is to take the ICO money and invest in profitable Bitcoin (and alts) projects. If they are successful at that, this could be a huge hit. If not, then it's just another coin.
But, to now take half of the investment dollars and use it to buy back the coins is nonsensical. Unless, and this is a big unless, they simply don't know what they are doing and/or they are dishonest. Otherwise, buying back the coins gives a short term boost to the coin and less money for investment (with less room for error). That is obviously nice for the immediate future and for people who want to sell as quickly as possible, but then we are all left with a coin that has less chance at success.
The only thing nonsensical here is your post. Did you bother to actually read the plan or did you just skim it? Using 25% of the funds to buy back 50% of the coins will increase our ROI by 50%. If you can't understand that then I can't help you. Will you please just leave it alone? Burning coins is a stupid idea. It was always a stupid idea and it will always be a stupid idea. Your logical mathematical theories do not apply to real life where there are many variables.. Stop trying to get the dev team to waste 25 BTC. Are you secretly trying to hurt this coin? 2 million is not a huge number of coins. I am buying the coins under 10k sats. Half the posts in the 40 page thread are you trying to convince everyone to get on board with your flawed reasoning. Respectfully please leave it the fuck alone. |
|
|
|
Moby Dick on poloniex:
"Shogun, I can see how it would work at this particular moment- they would need to be aggressive tho- and it doesn't seem they are motivated to do this."
Right. You would need someone they trust who could convince them. If you can't get Busoni or anyone, I don't think there's any point in fighting the good fight here. MobyDick is the resident coin expert on Poloniex and he thinks it would work. That quote is from the polo troll box just now. Right, but it doesn't seem like he's convinced anyone. edit: Do you get a different feeling? Nope looks like you're right. Ignorance and apathy everywhere. I normally wouldn't mind but I own a lot of QBK and I know this plan is a great idea. Your thinking is flawed. The 100 BTC goes towards growing the dividend. If you burn 25 BTC, you know only have 75 BTC to play with. Of course this will mean a lower dividend. Burning coins is a bad idea. |
|
|
|
|
Well, there's your problem. Why on earth are you still mining Scrypt coins? There are other algorithms.. if you're using AMD cards and paying for electricity it'll be tough to make a profit. Look into X11
|
|
|
|
bump  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
