So why did you franticly edit your post to remove the "NEM is a scam" footer once you'd been rumbled ?

Come-from-Above first post:



Come-from-Above quickly edited post 2 minutes later after being rumbled:

I think the joke might be on you.

You didn't read the small print in his post or check his posting history  


P.S. Nice try in removing that footer Come-From-Above but not fast enough I'm afraid.

Yep. Only a few hundred to go before 4th position.

I'm thinking it's possibly complex because there are 2 drivers for the price now, not just 1:

 - capital investors (people who are simple invested in the classic sense looking to make a long term gain based on the value of the DRK)
 - revenue investors (masternoders who are looking to make a weekly revenue from their investment)

Evan's price stabilisation mechanism is about to kick into play.

Presumably, many buyers right now are planning on running masternodes based on the current payout of about 2to 4 DRk per day. But what they could find when that actually deploy their masternode is that a whole lot of others were thinking the same thing and the payout has gone right down due to an overcrowded master node population. At that point, 2 things can happen:

[1] - the price went up so much (due to all that DRK being taken out of the money supply) that they are still satisfied with the payout in BTC terms and continue holding and running their master node

[2] - they now think the payout is too little and cash out causing a price drop

But in the event of [2] - the payout for the remaining masternodes will increase, rewarding the ones who stayed by offsetting their loss in value with an increase in revenue and this will then in turn have a stabilising effect the market price.

Quite an ingenious system. It's going to be interesting to see how it works in practice but I'm thinking we may see a price increase, followed by a correction while the master node population stabilises and separates out the "men from the boys" in terms of who the core masternode population.

Actually, there's some major panic buying going on right now over on BTC-e in the US Dollar market. The price got to 540 and than mass buy-ins and huge 5-minute green candle set in. Looks like a lot of people are just fine with the 51% "FUD" (which is what it is).

Try picking an argument you can win because I think you've lost this one - comprehensively.

You people have been spouting this crap for 6 months while these there things....

 - commercial activity
 - market cap
 - distribution

...continue to improve.

So you're not doing to well for the 'cause'.

Supply has all but dried up below 181.

(Make sure you "think outside of the box" before interpreting that observation    )

Thanks - not sure if I should take that as a compliment or not 

I believed in PPC for ages. I agree with you - it's a top coin by a top designer and I thought it had a good chance of overtaking Bitcoin at one point. But the design behind it is all to do with financial system infrastructures. It has a transaction fee and algo which lend itself to very large transactions and so was never designed to support retail level or commercial sector trading. It is basically the "bank transfers" backbone of crypto.

NxT on the other hand is a completely different animal. NXT has succeeded where PPC failed in the sense that it has captured its target market where PPC didn't (it may still do in the future though once crypto gets more established).

NXT has done exactly what it's designer set out to achieve - engender an organic, diverse and highly active commercial sector which has attracted 3rd party vendors not directly associated with the currency. It's not going "back in the bag" now either because it's survived the most intense period of mud being thrown at it and most of the mud throwers are now actually invested.

Although many still criticise it with 'instamine scam' labels, that is actually just a load of b.s. Even the distribution issue is now getting sorted out because the recent process have attracted high volume off-exchange buyers which have split the original holdings many times and these are finding their way into the lower tiers.

One argument that is constantly brought up is that the original holders made "too much money". I'd like to know what "too much" actually means other than as an expression of jealousy. It's noticaeable that such critics never have the balls to come out and state categorically that it's unethical and why it's unethical.

I can tell you why that is - because an "unethical" distribution would amount to taking money for something which has no market value, or who's market value is about to disappear and that isn't what's happened here. In fact the opposite is the case. No investor since it's launch is down on their investment unless you bought within a tiny timeframe during the last few days when the price peaked - and even then you'd only be down about 10%. Critics keep saying that the original holders are going to "crash the market" and leave everyone penniless and it keeps not happening and has less chance of happening with each month that the currency gets traded.

So all this 'scam' stuff is just empty garbage trotted out by the world-improver mining community thinking they're on some kind of ethical crusade but who are in fact clueless about how markets really work. Thankfully, there's only the odd one left now because the rest are all invested  

Mr 1304 got his master node.

Another chunk out of the resistance.

...and hot on his heels, here comes another match made in heaven. Ms 1606 with Mr 1316.

That appears to conclude the running for this particular 15-minute chart wave. Next one starts in maybe 1-2 hours. US traders coming into play then.

Icebucket was right - the resistance is weakening.


I seem to have made the wrong call earlier this week. I thought we'd bounced too many times off it and would start drifting back down before recovering towards the end of next week again.

But it's not happening. The strong demand is tipping the balance. They keep on coming and slowly eating that wall at 18.

Global timing is also bullish. Americans will wake up to see us at 18 and not 16 as they were perhaps hoping. That can create a bit of panic - specially with it being Saturday and all. Not only that but new buy walls are going up - there's now 8500 DRK demand above 170, up from about 4-5 last night.

Meanwhile the supply below 192 is down to 7400 from nearly 10,000 yesterday.

EDIT: While I wrote this we're already at 181. Breakout now on the cards. Thank f*k Minataur wrote that post last night about the "state of DRK" and made me buy back in because if we get through this wall, the old resistance will become the new support.

Well, now that a master node request has arrived at the top of the bid stack, I'm afraid I'm going to have to grab that 38 DRK shot sitting at the bottom of the asks.

I can see the thinking behind that order:

 - 1000 DRK for a masternode
 - 360 DRK for day trading

That's the problem. If you're in the market for masternodes it's not enough to buy just the 1000. You need 1000+ so you can take advantage of any gains with the residual holding. Otherwise your investment is locked up on a server unavailable for trading.

What garbage you post.

For a start, regarding liquidity, the bulk of liquidity in the NXT market does not occur on exchanges. Traders have been buying huge volumes off exchange, then they in turn trade that off exchange and so on. Only the small trades occur on exchanges which is why it looks like a low liquidity market but in fact isn't. Remember that because NXT was so different from classic cryptos, it took the exchanges a while to get hooked up to its block chain. In the meantime a large off-exchange market developed where the really big numbers were / are traded - not least the original distributions.

Secondly, you seem to make up your own definitions of "scam" which basically amounts to "people making too much money" in your book. If that's the case just stay out of the market. I don't consider it a scam because I've doubled my money since I bought and also recouped my investment at the same time. Many people who invested did the same. So I ask you again - who exactly is being scammed here ? It's a scam if you pay money for something of no market value. But if you pay money for something which DOES have a market value that's sustained and increasing then it's not a scam. Simple as that. So it would appear that neither the primary (on exchange) nor secondary (off exchange large volume) markets agree with you.

Thirdly, regarding  the points about mining, you're basically mixing two completely different approaches to distribution and getting your knickers in a twist. There's nothing more or less ethical about either - you just pays your money and takes your choice. Again, the markets ultimately decide what valuation to put on each and if you want to argue with that then feel free - but that's what investing is generally about: "Market Value" 

Well, sort of. Bitcoin went down a bit against the dollar. If it does that then DRK goes down too.

The DRK / BTC exchange is another question.

As it happens, I don't actually think that US Marshall BTC hitting the market is bad. All they're doing is taking BTC that was in cold storage and getting it out into the community.

Whats the problem with that ?

What's more, it isn't going to be hitting existing markets - it's going to be traded off exchange by auction. So that will be new buyers.

All progress IMO.

Here we go...

Market heating up.

18 breakout imminent.

The point isn't whether they're kids in their bedrooms or exotic mining firms. The point is that they are all uncontrolled third parties. ALL crypto currency networks are maintained by uncontrolled third parties - that's inherent in the term "decentralised".

I think what you're trying to say in a kind of roundabout way is that there is less redundancy in a heterogeneous network than a homogeneous one. That is certainly true but it isn't a showstopper, particularly when that heterogeneity is supporting a network-specific service.

I think it all depends on the implementation. It might be a weakness, on the other hand it might be very bullet proof. Look at the myriad of client-server or peer-to-peer applications on the internet that are very stable despite being "operated" under a wide range of hosting environments and end users.

I don't know enough about the master node implementation to know what its strengths and weaknesses are - I suspect you don't either. But the software should be robust enough to tolerate "what if they dont know enough about security?" and  "what if they just plain stop giving a shit?" scenarios 100 times over just like any critical network software should be.

At any rate, we're soon going to find out because it's going live in a week so you'll be able to observe it in action.

You mean like entrusting the integrity of the entire Bitcoin network to a morass of Tom Dick & Harry's running CGminer on their home PC's  

Yes, I agree.

182 is a key resistance level. In fact the 4 hours chart is a kind of carbon copy of this one...http://nicknasad.whotrades.com/blog/43640817527

jeez..Spain trounced.