We can go with chainz for the time being but improve the website and host our own BE. This is something I can provide, and I welcome any help from the community.

Webwallets should figure too. Not that hard.

This is what I'm talking about. Thanks for addressing my concerns!
I hope there is enough force within the community to make things happen.

I'm glad you didn't take it as a dev-based issue, because it's not. It's obvious that investors want the best for Swing, but they need to put something more than their btc in it if we want to go forward.

Let's create a community and figure out where to go next.

Thanks murderouskirk

No problemus.

It hurts to read a thread where everyone turns a blind eye on things they agree, yet their greed belief takes over.

Investors cemetery.

I'm just gonna quote what I don't agree on.

It's pretty clear there's some sort of misunderstanding. It has nothing to do with your work ethic. Alas, it would be naive to figure markets are to be avoided when a new currency is created. Not sure if you are aware, I believe so though, but this model is a fantastic solution to many of our known currency issues.

My issue is, regarding this specific quoted topic, exactly what you pointed out: value. It has an inherent factor that is speculation, something that only exists when value is attached. I'm not in favor of vaporware nor deception. I'm asking what is in the pipes as for now, since it seems this awesome reward system isn't enough to grab attention.

I believe something should be done to bring this forward to other audiences. It's an important development and it has little supporters.

Regarding all your other points that I didn't quote, I absolutely agree on all, and again I state my willingness to help if needed.

Thanks for the good work. Hope you understand what I mean.

Reserve

*Edit: No point to go further with this post, since I explained my vision a few posts down.

That's why we need to merge apples and oranges. Putting down value in the dark like this is non-sense. You wish a return after 8 days, but the odds - given what is presented - are minimal, or at least very doubtful. It's belief based. Fuck that.

Crypto should continue to be anonymous and decentralized, yet no reason for its projects to have any ambiguous and/or obscure details.

Whatever, your call.

Yet it's not possible to accurate predict market prices, given the adherent factors, such as the fact there is no certainty there will be a market.

There are many kind of risks. Hypothetically, I present you an ICO filled with awesome propositions that I can't deliver yet they sound somewhat believable: you're gonna buy on the risk - or gamble unaware of its odds, which, by the way, are impossible to determine.

I'm giving the benefit of doubt, sure, but this could go both ways easily.

Worst case scenario, if there is a market above ICO price with enough support, devs can dump whatever they bought. The two weeks or whatever is after end of sale don't sound good imo. If doesn't go waaaay over ICO price, there's already 200 BTC in the pocket, why worry? Fuck the useless chain. Let the bagholders be.

Best case scenario, the project is legit and communication is poor and sketchy as hell. I mean, do you expect me to be satisfied with the amount of proof of viability presented in exchange for almost 50k US dollars? People went apeshit with Ethereum when they had a perfectly well explained project and a well-known team behind it, publicly visible.

Outside crypto, would you invest into a perfectly legitimate start-up that needs 50k and has amazing prospects? Generally, I doubt.

The odds, if we're still discussing them, can be sorted out based on this question: What is it more likely?

- to pocket 200 BTC in exchange for the given promises, plus maybe a quite a few extra bitcoins on market dumping
- spend 200 BTC developing quite a few never before seen technologies, on a fork, from a newbie account, that has no website, no references, and presents nothing than image/text based poor explanations, incapable or unwilling to show his ability to create such advances

The problem here is, we have people that want to flip a quick buck. When they're presented with something credible, it's too hard for them to understand. When they see something like this, they fucking get it, they get all hot because it sounds great and they even understand it! But they don't know if it's even possible for such promises to be achieved.

I hope I'm wrong for your sake. Again, I give the benefit of the doubt. It would not be the first time a very good coin started with such shady clues.
But if, and again, IF, this will turn out wrong, you'll be saying either "oh fuck it, I can get it back", or "motherfucking scammers". Either way, they'll have 200 BTC and even more space to come back with other project like this. Over and over.

Sorry for the rant. The main thing I want to point out is judgement, not gamble. Critical thinking is necessary if you care about your money and your investments. I am not disregarding the dev or delivering fud or whatever.

Not really. You can calculate gambling odds, whereas here you have to make a judgement whether or not to believe in the feasibility of the project, among other factors.

Well, I'd not give much attention to that guy. But anyway, it's kinda true that's it sounds and looks based of other failed alt projects. With a lot of innovations added. Truth is, none of those innovations were demonstrated through example code or practical exposure, but by prose. Which is something anybody can do. Anybody can ask for 1000 BTC via an ICO and claim to offer such innovations, if only they're believable to some point. How many of you here have researched for the project's viability?

For a 200 BTC ICO, I'd expect a bit more skepticism from the investors. More information does not hurt; in fact, if legit, would cause a faster sell out.

I don't know what to think of this, to be honest. It smells a little, which is not good. But it offers something great, which makes it tempting.

According to this scale, I'd say make your own judgement before investing.

Honestly I don't think it's surprising.

Interesting innovation here, which is great, but besides that it seems there's not much going on. I still wonder if the dev has further plans. I've tried to reach a few times, as a community member, to no avail.

Swing rewards are original and the development shouldn't stop there. It has great room for a long road with the proper choices made. What is the purpose of a market listing other than create speculation on further development? It's not like the current state itself has enough value for demand.

Even if the staking is great, what's its use when it has no value market wise?

Don't get me wrong, I'm on the supporting side. Just wondering what kind of work is being done.

I have some ideas for it, maybe we can all discuss something.

*Edit: This is open source, don't forget that. Some time, we'll get somebody forking this and adding other features on top of it. So I really think something should be done to protect the holders of Greed, GE and Swing, before new based-like projects come along.

I'm not sure I fully understand the extent of this, but I'll gladly help with all I can.

It brings a few questions. Do you want to train everybody in order for them to become proficient in getting the most rewards regarding mining and market selling? Not sure that is the best way. Once every miner figures it out we'll see a pretty consistent wave which will not help trading imo.

I think we should encourage some thought into swing and let people figure it out, giving enough information of course.

But publishing a guide/chart that will - eventually - only explain how to profit, is a no go in my opinion.

There are many other ways in which we can spark interest. The nature of the coin will be figured out and dealt with properly once we reach the right people. And then all will happen naturally.

At this point, I'd be more concerned into finding good metaphors as explaining terms, instead of providing charts. Because, to be honest, a buy side has to be built, and that's only gonna happen if the money out there understands this whole swing thing. I'd focus on that.

So here we are, with a good coin that has zero market interest.

Why a good coin? Swinging rewards have never been done before. Why is that good? I believe it's a good way to reinstate fairness into the game. Yet, miners are greedy or unaware of cost vs market profit, and stakers will keep staking because the rewards are way too good.

Keep in mind that mining costs will always vary over time. This is some serious shit.

It will bring miners into swing mode, if they want their mining to pay off. They will have to adapt to the inherited swinging nature of block rewards, which is a step up in the game. They will have to be smart over their selling, and pick it up again at the smartest time.

This is why there is no market at the moment. This is new. They don't know how to handle it. They haven't yet figured out the waves. And the lurkers haven't realized the potential in this.

Time will come, either naturally, or we might need to put up some explanations/guides.

Rewarding wise, very interesting.

Community wise? Further development?

I average 30 min between stakes, and often get two on a row, ranging between 2 and 10 SWING.

A few days into staking and I have 570 SWING, raising my position by 16%. So whatever.

Again, I didn't say that was a bad thing, quite the opposite actually.
Thanks for being very open to questions.

Thanks for addressing concerns. Say hello to YoBit.

I didn't imply what his job is. Merely stated the obvious.

That involves zero work. But +1 for honesty. I'll watch closely.