I know this is probably a shock to you but NO ONE even looks at the blockchain, alright? Just the parents' basement stoner jerkoffs, get it? And the people that actually code, of course.No users, adopters, people piked by the possibilities of the platform... nobody. No reason for it at all. People need only to look at the price fluctuations to see the REALITY of that particular debacle, why would anyone look at the blockchain to corroborate that, even if they were so inclined? It's utter nonsense. And you know it.

And for the "intimidating factor" well, there's insn't anything to learn on that respect by looking at the blockchain, is there? They just have to read a few posts, or the forum, or the other thread, or wikipedia, or the seemingly thousands of other sources of further intimidation... even if they were really hard on "getting to know" NXT what, as of this moment, is one of the coins that has lost more money in the last few months of all the 555 coins listed on Coinmarketcap... what would be the incentive? You may or may not know this but people goes where the money goes. And it has been MANY MONTHS since it last went NXT's way.

QAnyway, I'm done with the subject. Adding anything else would be absurdly contributing to the clutter.

Sorry that I forgot to respond to this. Cryptsy is THE house that I know very well off that has had and still has continuous problems with NXT... as recently as 2 weeks ago with withdrawals not being possible FOR OVER A WEEK!. It is a well know fact that Cryptsy has had all kinds of problems with NXT since the very beginning and they don't seem to be even close to resolves for they continue to pop up.

I guess you were kind of counting on my not providing a straight answer (that would be a first, just for you to know). There have been others, including the one you mention too but I don't hyave first person, direct knowledge of them, therefore I don't mention them specifically. Cryptsy, being one of the biggest, I guess qualifies enough, right?

So, to put the baby to rest so to speak, IT IS INDEED A PROBLEM that a correlation clearly exists between the "success" of the platform and the decimation suffered by the price in recent months. FACT.

It is more than probable, for a huge percentage of crypto users will agree with that (and no, I don't have the specifics, but you yourself, in another thread, offer the BIGGEST corroboration of this possible), that the complexity of the coin, the wallet and the project, defined by me as the "intimidation factor", would precisely be he CAUSE you so direly are looking for FACT number one. Which, of course, were the points I wanted to hammer across in search of corrective solutions, before they were (tried to) diluted by you and other fan boys absolute nonsense in the last 2 pages of posts.

So, I would suggest that an efforts of significant proportions should be made to significantly REDUCE that complexity and to try to eliminate the "intimidation factor". I am convince such efforts could produce significantly positive results in adoption, at least inside crypto. And by that I mean going WAY BEYOND the scope of what has been done so far that, frankly, has only contributed to a clutter of "information" near impossible to sort out and, again, producing the exact opposite of the expected effect: Scaring people off rather than inform them and, through that information, making the intimidation disappear. I would even suggest something like one of two videos, as a good starting point. Perhaps a very simple FAQs section in the BTCT thread and on the Forum... NOT OPEN TO "CLARIFICATIONS" OR DEBATE, just simple, straightforward answers to common question. Perhaps also a whole thread dedicated to people who is new to the coin and (separated) the platform, in which to bring up the very basics along with the new features, again, in a simple, easy to understand BY EVERYONE, manner. I don't know, there are many actions that should be taken... first one, by a long shot, eliminating condescending post from fan boy jerkoffs with an agenda. Or, in more "civilized" terms, the solution would start only when recognition that the problem exist is achieved. In your particular case, starting by admitting that, precisely, yourself. Then -and only then- a debate, a productive one, is possible.

Not very likely, I'm afraid, if my intuition is to be trusted...

What?!?!? Those 2 models of honesty, the nazi and BobSurplus, they wouldnt do such a thing... no way!

 How much would you consider significant, motor mouth? Because I was able to snatch as much as I could afford -liquidity- at the time...

No, no matter how much you insist, we are and we will always be back at #1.- There's a direct correlation, causal or not, between the "success" of the platform and the decimation of the price/cap. and #2.- It is my opinion that perhaps the sheer complexity of the project, from the coin wallet (causing problems in every trading house to this day) to the barrage of "assets" (most of them of very ridiculous nature) and other features

Now try to divert from those point at your leisure. But careful with fact, like that other motor mouth above, unless you are willing to put your money where you mouth is, ok?

Thyat's the part in his post that you find "not funny"? Wow!

This guy's obviously KKK, but I didn't think you would be in that group...

 What does the blockexplorer have to do with any of the mentioned? The same than your preposterous "causals", totally unrelated and seeking only to disperse the real content and facts with mere crap. Just like your -again totally erroneous- mention of the recent low price of BTC which was in the low to mid 160s, only a few weeks ago, as opposed to your stated $171 (maybe you will also entertain a frindly wager, since I personally have transaction at near that level on Coinbase, how's that?). Just pure mere crap. Even to disputed something intended as an approximation (that happens to be EXCEEDED, unless BTC turn suddenly down between the time I write this and post it, it sit at MORE that 40% above recent lows, ok?).

The absurd "defense" of an obvious blind agenda, also pretends comparison with other coins, which it isn't not only irrelevant but absurd beyond description for there have been coins that have disappeared, other that have fluorised, others that have stagnated around similar levels and some others, finally, with some degree of losses, more and less than NXT, as the case might be, but that includes all kinds of outright scams, discovery of hidden instamines and a myriad of other circumstances... hardly any case in which the "success" of the project has resulted in the decimation of the cap/price.

Try again. It's quite funny to watch your efforts... although, sadly, doesn't bring the discussion any further, much less in the approximate direction of a correction of what obviously is not just not working but working for the other team.

Of note: Some of the people receiving coins in the iCO has been robbed. Ask me if I am surprised... Of course Bobsurplus and the nazi claim it is "hackers".... wow...

Several things: No, I define the "rich as the top 70 or so holders of the coin. Clear enough, I hope. You can lower the figure even to the top 50, ok?

Blockchain bloating is as of now still unresolved concern of every altcoin, not just NXT so no, it isn't a "good" thing at all (it slows the transactions, you know, a no-no in crypto if it ever is to reach any level of real world adoption.

Now, the UNDENIABLE correlation between the growth in features and "assets" of the NXT platform with the decimation -you can use the adjective of your personal preference here- of the price (market cap) would indicate to anyone with even a minimal amount of brains in their skull that something WRONG is definitely going on for the opposite, if anything, is to be expected, right? In the present as well as the (near) future -ad you MUST know that the markets always trade the future-. Maybe, as you kind of point out, the "fee IS set too low". I don't know. What I know is the obvious correlation that, by extension, clearly indicates that the bigger the "success", this kind of "success" anyway, the lower the price/market cap. And that bis worrysome and definitely worth debating in order to determine corrective action.

Once again, the excuse that it is a slump in crypto doesn't fly: BTC itself sit at roughly a 40% gain from recent lows in similar period of time as the decimation of NXT cap/price. And many other established coin projects have also significantly increased in that period also. So if you are looking for solutions, instead of serving agendas by denying the obvious FACTS, you better get to the nitty gritty of why this apparent discordance is indeed happening and, more importantly, thinking ways to turn the ship around. Because it is going in all the wrong directions as of recent months.

I'm just trying to grasp what you write, because it is quite confusing some times. And what comes through clearly, in some cases, are points which are in direct opposition with the reality which is the base of this discussions from the get go. Once more, 2 points: 1.- The "success" of the platform (counted in growing number of features and growing number of so called "assets"), is going in DIRECT proportion to the disarray in the price of the coin, which has been decimated of late. 2.- The complexity of NXT, from the wallet to ANYTHING ELSE, is -in my opinion- an intimidating factor that is responsible for the lack of general adoption both in the crypto scene and, especially, out there in the regular world. You have admitted to the complexity, somewhat, but then again you try to diminish that factor effect by putting it on the same level of complexity as Bitcpoin, which is utterly absurd for hundreds of reasons not the least of which is that you can get (and use to buy practically all goods, real world use goods) in ATMs in many (and growing) of the big cities of the world. And you dismiss the #1 FACT by appealing to a "future" (without any time constrains), that simply makes the debate stall. As it is. Sorry ut with those approaches to actual, factual, corroborated PROBLEMS and EFFECTS, it is impossible to have a real debate or even a conversation. Sorry also that you perceive the clarifications as being diminishing of you personally, not my intention. But the conversation is in English and yours is quite confusing... but NOT the cause of our disagreements at all.

And, like in all you say, there's simply BS. I myself purchased coins at 2,6k 24 hours ago -and it went down to 2,5k-. But keep bulshitting and guessing, it is ridiculous but somewhat funn y... Remember: Last night, 24 hours ago, lowest price 2,5k. Cryptsy (for some nice wager I'll show you my own transaction at 2,6..., deal? Or just the usual bull crap?)

Edit to add: It is Bull crap as usual, right?

I see good action there... bids are low though. Which is good because I want to buy rather than sell.

It is not worth to even write about it. People will be burned by the obvious scam. But they all fully deserve it since they have been warned with plenty of time. Scammer Bobsurplus and nazi/spammer/scammer Guerbuez or whatever behind this, it's as clear as 2+2...

Again we have a language problem, obviously. See, when talking about "complexity", much like about "virginity", one can hardly face a situation where "which is partially true", as you put it, applies. It either is or isn't. And then, if it is, there might be levels, or degrees but no "partiality". It is very difficult to agree on anything when the statements come through so inappropriately. Once again, the complexity of the "coin"/platform is an inhibitor in adoption. At every level of computer/crypto knowledge. That isn't subject to opinion or "partiality", ok? the degree or level of inhibition, may be up for "personal opinion", but not the indisputable fact. There cannot be argument there. Same thing applies to "distribution" and same thing applies to the decimation of the price in DIRECT relationship with the growth and "success" of the platform. Those are FACTS, not subject to opinions or agendas. And, as such, perhaps, worthy of evaluation and debate for to any normal, common-sensical person they would perhaps indicated we are going in the wrong direction, rather than the appropriate one. Same also applies to (in your opinion) "little punishment": Fact is the stake or forging isn't proportional ("exactly" is redundant and unnecessary). You cannot be "a little non-virgin", get my meaning?

Now, as for "positives", isn't it needed a reevaluation of the general direction and perhaps current structure of the project, since success equals decimation of price? A legitimate question based on irrefutable FACTS.

Now, for you it isn't because you, well, you just believe or hope that THE FUTURE will solve all those questions and problems short of by itself. The future has this thing: It tends to be a CONSEQUENCE of previous actions/facts. And, in general, when it comes to investment, THE FUTURE needs to be bound in time by results. The future of Bayern Munich is going to be probably brilliant IF necessary measures are taken (and they need to be taken or it won't be brilliant at all), but the foreseeable future is that it won't even be in the Cup's finals, let alone contend for it, get it? Of as some old saying puts it: In the future we all be bald. And dead. So, no matter how much you want it to be attached to your agenda, the futures is, well, already past when it comes to proper examination: Before you read this long post, it was future. Now that you have read it, it is past.

First, obviously we have a very different interpretation of what "price decimation" is. For you it would mean at least going to 1000 sat, since NXT touched 10k sat not too long ago (a few months, very few). For me decimated price means anything beyond 1/2 lost. And it has gone not just there but 2/3 lost and even, as close as 24 hours ago, 3/4 lost. "You", the collective "you" -I imagine the cheerleaders of NXT- may have a name for that.... I do too and it is "delusional". I doubt yours will be the same. As for "tactic", well, that explains pretty much all there's to explain, right?. Just like avoiding the FACTS: tHE MOST SUCCESSFUL THE PLATFORM HAS BEEN IN MANY MONTHS, THE WORSE IS HAS REFLECTED IN THE PRICE. Which, to any normal person would indicate at least the red light that maybe something is being done wrong somewhere and that success without monetization -as reflected in price- is not real success but, actually, the opposite. Finally ignoring the "not exactly proportional" distribution of forging, goes to the clumsy attempts as ignoring the truth. And the FACTS. Which, as we now know, is just typical of you and where you stand. Please don't let reality and facts intefere with your agenda, by any means, ok?

Usecryptos seem to be working properly now (I am pending their verification, after all these months....) so I will keep everyone posted as soon as the process is complete.

Obviously we seem to have a language problem. I stated I don't care about the fairness or not of the process but I do care about the distribution resulting because it IS a problem, whether fair or unfair. Also you should take a look at the forging process and you will discover you are WRONG in your assumptions. Finally, I don't "complain". I state educated concerns, rather. As for so called "whales" with the current volume there are no whales, in fact, just people dumping and a few picking up perceived cheap coins. Whales need volume to operate and a few BTC every day is NOT in their realm. They are, at this point, just a figment of your imagination, a scapegoat as it were for you to rationalize -only in your mind- why the price action is so negative instead of looking at the real picture.

Absolutely right. But, please, think about it for a sec: Why would ANY REPUTED DEV want to be involved with this absurd and ridicule project when he can, instead, start his/her own coin project?

Sorry but it's doom and doomer...

In just two words, not 2 sentences: It's dead.