Glad to see you're still on that Ercoin plan.

Awesome. Not much to worry out to begin with, BLK can't be exit-scammed, which is the only thing they're worried for. Then I suppose all you need now is some other BLK big shots willing to vouch you're the real thing. Vince and Janko should get in on that.

A legally accountable person is a must for any project these days. Without it, it won't be traded on exchanges. This may also be the main hurdle to get on Binance. You said they want all kinds of fishy information before they list but that shit only seems to apply to the usual ICO scams. For a legit coin like BLK, they would only require a representative that is responsible for the project should anything ever go wrong. After all, they listed Navcoin, which is the most similar thing to BLK. That community doesn't have a warchest either. There's no way they'd be able to cough up the funds for a 'non-legit project'  listing fee.   

If you're willing to give Binance just that, accountability, I'm sure they'd have BLK up in there in no time.

Oh I agree with the whole energy argument. Nobody cares, and if they do, then they see the huge energy consumption of Bitcoin as a prove of value rather than a burden.   

BLK's strength is that it's PoS with the most integrity. There's no veiled mechanics that make the rich richer, anyone can participate.

Still, Poloniex is not to be sniffed at. I don't trust the volume on Coinegg and Bittrex is only marginally larger than Poloniex. Unless this is some giant insider trading scheme that finally ends in the crescendo of BLK being added to Binance (and there's a massive chance they eventually will considering they added NAV for free as well), I think it looks bleak.

Ouch, there goes 18% of the volume.  Thanks for pointing this out. 

Fair enough.

Sadly BLK was way more active last summer. But the Slack channel got to full capacity and moving to Gitter lost a lot of active users.

Lesson learned. Do not use Slack as a community platform. It isn't meant for large groups. 

https://gitter.im/BlackCoin_Hub  

The ratio could be anything 1:2, 1:5, 1:10 it doesn't matter.  

Blackcoin CANNOT be mined. You're spreading misinformation.

Blackhalo would need that initial kernel to get the snowball growing. Maybe full trades (fiat for goods) may be setting the bar too high for most people. A slightly lower type of usage is lending, the sharing economy. Like those apps that let people put all kind of equipment up for sharing. The flaw in those systems is that it's completely reputation based. You have no idea in what kind of state you'll see your equipment back.  

Blackhalo is the perfect escrow for that. Both people put their BLK in the escrow, there's no transaction, but the smart contract sits there until someone lended their stuff, the other brought it back in a satisfactory state and both people are happy. Though it'd be advisory for the person who uses the equipment to put in a higher (2x) escrow than the lender due to the asymmetrical nature of the trade.  

I tried to explain escrow transactions to a friend of mine, and only once I brought up this lending example it 'clicked' for him.

 

The option to burn BLK for a new coin is great for BLK. It really raises the value of Blackcoin. Value comes in but it doesn't go back out again.

Right. I can also open a lemonade stand and buy Blackcoin with the profits, but that doesn't mean I'm squeezing Blackcoin juice. 

(You can't mine BLK at all, it's pure stake)

To be precise:
https://pinode.weebly.com/blackcoin.html 

Yes they will be the same reward. Pool-staking is useless for BLK. Though maybe there are other coins that increase the relative amount depending on how much is staked, in which case pool-staking would work. Just not for BLK, and intentionally so as that would encourage centralization. 

That doesn't sound right. I'm pretty sure that the 739k coins each year are issued evenly over every coin staking.   

There's no minimum or maximum stake, everyone stakes the same percentage. I like the idea on paper, it would create more participation. However, in reality the only thing a maximum stake would do is cause wealthy stakers to divide their coins over more nodes to circumvent the minimum.  

If you had 50k blk, and the maximum was 1k, then you would simply run 5 raspberry pi's  each with 10k and it would be the same as staking 50k.  

I hope that makes sense.

He's indecipherable. We have no idea what he's doing or what he wishes to achieve. However, the way Blackcoin is  setup means that he doesn't  rule the coin. A few months ago the network already voted on Janko's build to continue so he's pretty much of the game. That is, unless he wishes to cooperate again. There's no point in burning bridges either, the guy did create the most solid form of Proof of Stake after all.  

Blackcoin keeps being cloned by very new coins:  



 

Rat, the original founder, owns that thread. Bitcointalk forum rules say he gets to  do whatever he wants with it. That's why we're here.

Blackcoin would be a straight vertical line (representing the pow phase in the week it launched) and then the inflation would start above 100% as there's no hard supply cap, only a soft one determined by the 0.97% inflation (of the starting supply)    

Blackoin inflates with 739k each year, like 1% but that percentage decreases due to inflation being a flat rate rather than proportional. 

That's not the full picture though considering the context. BLK happened to be launched during a miningpool craze where everyone just mined the most profitable coins and immediately sold them on exchanges. It's most likely that's where most of BLK's early coins ended up.

Doge and Dash both started with a year of hyperinflation. Fairly okay for proper dispersion.

On the other hand, Ripple and NEO can't even be mined. These coins can make new supply at will, whenever the team needs it.