 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
Hey stuhl are you coming out say something or let the coin die?
Who is this stuhl you speak of? Mr. Stuhlman(do not know his real name) is the main co-ordinator/top guy in CAIX foundation. He is SINCERE and responsible does what he said/Promised (gave back 14 btc to everybody who staked as promised for masternodes)(I did not get any because I did not qualify.I Had less than 2000 CAIX). I guess I see him as MAN OF HONOUR... Interesting. So how much did he give back after promising to try to reimburse those of us who got effed during the PoW to PoS fiasco? I was among the first and definitely the most vocal to discuss the issue. Not only did I never receive a valid, direct response to the most important issues I raised, I haven't seen any CAIx. I also haven't heard of any others receiving any CAIx based on that promise (I don't read every post here, so I may have missed something, but I was checking daily for a while). Regardless, at current prices, he probably owes me like $1 worth of CAIx if he wants to uphold that promise. But I've seen nothing. Not even a response to my thread on the CAIx board saying that they're working on it. The coin is dead. Accept it and move on. But at least you got a nice wallet out of it. |
|
|
|
My original question was why you would want to reward hoarding--whether it be just for the month of June, or in the long-term. I understand that this payout is a one-time thing. But I have also seen information that would indicate to me that there is some possibility of future payouts of that nature using revenues from miners, games, etc. I've seen no guarantees, but it seems to be at least potentially part of the plan. If that's incorrect, then that answers my questions about long-term dividend payouts.
Thanks for clearing that out for me, wasn't sure where u were asking for. It is indeed a possibility that the program will be extended, BUT this is currently being heavily discussed by the foundation, so no guarantees. We wont release anything official untill everything has been decided. If it would get extended, everything about the funding etc will be explained in detail. We are not trying to reward the hoarding itself, we are rewarding loyal community members and the dividend program was the best way to do that in our opinion. How would you suggest we should've fairly distributed the 14 BTC? Maybe you have some good ideas for us  . Suggestions are always welcome. Off the top of my head, I would say partially reimburse some retailers for selling goods in exchange for CAIx. Throwing money at people who happened to mine the coin during the POW stage or buy it up shortly after does nothing for the longevity of CAIx that I can see. But helping to actually make the coin useful makes it more valuable to anyone who actually wants to use cryptocurrency, rather than just mine and translate into fiat. And, not to nitpick on your wording, but I would like to say that this isn't about "fair" distribution; it's about what increases the value/utility of the currency. Just out of curiosity, what is the level of economic and marketing expertise within the development and foundation group? This isn't intended as an attack. I am just trying to get a better feel for how this is operating. |
|
|
|
|
I'm curious why you ask which features are important to the crypto community. In my view, the focus on miners is probably doing a lot to hold back real innovation. I view cryptocurrencies as being kind of like languages, in that no matter how good they are technically, their value/utility is really tied to the number of people who can be convinced to use them. What I see in the alt-coin world is a bunch of people trying to further refine Esperanto while English (bitcoin) continues its dominance. I do mine them, but only because some people are willing to trade BTC for them.
|
|
|
|
Focusing on increasing the value isn't necessarily a problem. It goes hand-in-hand with making it useful for something. What I don't understand is discouraging its use by incentivizing hoarding. It seems like they're trying to treat this kind of like a stock that pays dividends; but it doesn't pay dividends unless you hold a certain amount of shares, and the business plan to fund those dividends long-term doesn't seem very clear (and it's not really publicly owned). Part of the reason I dropped out. Their sole purpose is to raise the price only, not to have it used for anything. And they can't even deliver that. But doesn't this hurt the value of CAIx? People who are disqualified dump and nobody has a chance to buy in as a node anymore.
Honestly we don't see it that way, we just want to reward the people that are simply holding this coin. The dividend program and the way it works seemed like a very good way to do exactly that... Why do you want to reward this? To grow a currency, I would think you would want the early adopters spending at least some of their coins, and their reward would be the increase in value that comes with a wider user base. I don't know why you're asking for a business plan for future funds? The dividend program is currently a one time thing, funded by the 14 BTC that we received from investors. Read all about the project here. My original question was why you would want to reward hoarding--whether it be just for the month of June, or in the long-term. I understand that this payout is a one-time thing. But I have also seen information that would indicate to me that there is some possibility of future payouts of that nature using revenues from miners, games, etc. I've seen no guarantees, but it seems to be at least potentially part of the plan. If that's incorrect, then that answers my questions about long-term dividend payouts. |
|
|
|
Focusing on increasing the value isn't necessarily a problem. It goes hand-in-hand with making it useful for something. What I don't understand is discouraging its use by incentivizing hoarding. It seems like they're trying to treat this kind of like a stock that pays dividends; but it doesn't pay dividends unless you hold a certain amount of shares, and the business plan to fund those dividends long-term doesn't seem very clear (and it's not really publicly owned). Part of the reason I dropped out. Their sole purpose is to raise the price only, not to have it used for anything. And they can't even deliver that. But doesn't this hurt the value of CAIx? People who are disqualified dump and nobody has a chance to buy in as a node anymore.
Honestly we don't see it that way, we just want to reward the people that are simply holding this coin. The dividend program and the way it works seemed like a very good way to do exactly that... Why do you want to reward this? To grow a currency, I would think you would want the early adopters spending at least some of their coins, and their reward would be the increase in value that comes with a wider user base. |
|
|
|
But doesn't this hurt the value of CAIx? People who are disqualified dump and nobody has a chance to buy in as a node anymore.
Honestly we don't see it that way, we just want to reward the people that are simply holding this coin. The dividend program and the way it works seemed like a very good way to do exactly that... Why do you want to reward this? To grow a currency, I would think you would want the early adopters spending at least some of their coins, and their reward would be the increase in value that comes with a wider user base. |
|
|
|
Any premine nowadays is an awful idea. 51% attack is not a solution, since the value needed to take over the network was slightly increased by 20%. Which means you have nothing against 71% attack. Moreover, the coin has nothing new to offer.
It actually requires about 40% more resources to perform a 71% attack as opposed to a 51% attack. I agree that for someone who can get 51% of the hash rate, getting 71% instead probably isn't nearly as difficult as, say, someone getting from 1% to 21%. But I have a difficult time seeing how this increase in the threshold is completely without value. |
|
|
|
I can confirm 3275 on vapor-x, any good configs for 7950, 7970 and 290x?
I got about 2500-2575 on my XFX 7950s, and 1500 on my 270 when I tested them yesterday. I can post my settings later if there is any interest. |
|
|
|
I've seen nothing so far, and I definitely met the requirements, and was among the first to start posting about the issue here. I can't say what his situation is, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about--as usual. What is your obsession with the misguided idea that people who didn't get their coins exchanged before CAIx ran out and aren't happy about it are somehow dishonest? Stuhlman and the devs have enacted measures to reimburse us, they have created a central outlet for important news and they have cleaned up the OP--all of which would appear to be direct responses to this issue. They have acknowledged that part of the rationale for streamlining communication to the investors is that not everyone has time to keep up with every post in this thread. They don't do these things out of pity. They may very well be decent, caring human beings; but the only reason a business takes these kinds of measures is because they realize that they messed up. You're not doing the cause of CAIx any good by continuing to ridicule people with legitimate complaints. I think maybe you did not meet the legitimate requirements for Stuhlman's offer to compensate people for not exchanging their coins in time. And now you want to threaten people over it.... Wow... just wow..... My CAIx balance on XtfXfEdahJ3tV4ZnK6atmDeRj4PPP1YdDv is still zero.
There are several of us who lost money because of your kill-CAISHEN tactics.
I am thinking about getting them all together, and then we keep
on posting our message into this thread - until the devs, or you,
the CAI community, show signs of repairing this unsolved problem.
TL;DR:
I will stop bothering you,
when you send CAIx for my 212.5 CAISHEN to:
XtfXfEdahJ3tV4ZnK6atmDeRj4PPP1YdDv
P.S.: I wrote to TheStuhlman and Caishen_Project, but got no answer so far.
|
|
|
|
Nobody unfairly lost out. Everybody had the same opportunity to cash in their CAI. You didn't pay attention to your investment and it went up in smoke. @111magic Ignore TheGer - he is an asshole that is too pigheaded to understand that people have unfairly lost out and feel let down by CAI. He apparently is overjoyed that he contributed to other peoples misery and likes to rub salt in the wound at every opportunity.
As far as your CAI go, there is no way that they can be exchanged now - There was a total of 1.6Mil CAIx available and they have all been taken. Send a PM to TheStuhlman with your CAI and CAIx addresses, as well as your balance before the 18th of this month. He offered earlier in this thread to use his own equipment to mine on the multipool to help earn your balance in CAIx - I don't know if this offer is still open, but is your best chance. You won't get it back straight away, but he may eventually come through.
You're not the only person in this situation - I can only hope it works out OK for us all in the end.
I hope for your sake that you're not serious. If someone started a company, sold you some shares, changed their name with a month's notice, and sold your shares in the new company to someone else just because they claimed them first, would you call it anything other than a scam? I think those of us who got left out are being extremely restrained with our objections. And I don't understand why those of you who still have a stake in the company aren't more concerned about the way this was handled. Both the execution and response to complaints reek of amateur hour, and more people here should be concerned about the way that your investment is being managed. I like a lot of the ideas behind CAI, which is why I find all of this so frustrating--and I don't think I'm the only one who feels that way. And to the developers, I would like to remind you that it is typically only a very small portion of dissatisfied clients who speak up about their issues. For every one of us who says something here about this, there are probably many more who will just walk away, never come back, and maybe direct their complaints to other potential investors. |
|
|
|
I know I'm an asshole but I have to admit it gives a sense of satisfaction to see how people complain they weren't given proper warning of the CAIx switch when it was plain as day for a long ass time. Those people deserve what they get.... Nothing!
Nope - you are an asshole for being so short sighted and not accepting that it is irrelevant whether or not people were aware of the switch. There were more CAI mined than CAIx available - simple logic says that given that fact, some people would get nothing. Don't waste your time arguing. I went around and around on this issue and several others last week, and got nothing but derision and dismissal. TheStuhlman did offer to exchange my CAI, but I don't think I've received any CAIx yet (I know it will take time) and I've seen no indication from anyone who didn't lose coins that there might have been a better way to handle the transition. Apparently the devs nailed it on the first try and there is no room for discussion. All coins transitioning from PoW to PoS in the future should handle it exactly as it was handled here. |
|
|
|
Like I said earlier.... They are coming out of the woodwork now all asking for handouts.
YOU DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR INVESTMENT AND YOU MISSED OUT. BLAME YOURSELVES AND STOP ASKING STUHLMAN FOR CHARITY, THERE IS NO CAIX LEFT!
YOU SHOULD BE EMBARASSED AND ASHAMED TO COME IN HERE BEGGING FOR HANDOUTS NOW.
Who asked for a handout? Nobody asked for charity; he was nice enough to offer to exchange the coins that we were led to believe would be available. But this shouldn't have been necessary. Their plan guaranteed that this would happen, and there should have been planned measures in place to cover the gap. I am still waiting for someone to show me exactly what text was posted in the OP that specifically said that coins not exchanged by a certain time would be lost. Stuhlman said that there was wording to that effect, but I don't remember seeing it and I suspect that the wording did not actually convey the message as clearly as he intended for it to. I don't see anyone claiming that they knew nothing about the transition; I see people who, like myself, didn't read every post in the thread and were led to a misunderstanding about some important details. This is why the official outlets of information (the OP and website) need to have unambiguous and complete information about such things. Tweets and crypto articles and posts scattered through this thread are not sufficient by themselves. As investors in this enterprise, I can't believe the general indifference to the mishandling of this situation. Many of you act as if we should be glad that it wasn't a straight-up scam. Is that really the standard that we should be measuring against? |
|
|
|
O.K. can we be done with this. I had to double check to make sure I wasn't on the blackcoin thread. I wasn't this upset when I was deliberately scammed. Time to put on big boy pants and move on guys.
I'm not really upset. I just think that a worthwhile dev team should have reasonable answers to my questions. I don't badger people like this in my personal life, but I don't let people off the hook so easily when it comes to business--and when you are managing millions of dollars worth of assets, I expect you to operate professionally. Any of the following statements from them would have ended this: "Here is a clear explanation as to why your concerns are invalid and you're just SOL: [insert explanation here]" "Here is a clear explanation as to why your concerns are invalid, but we're going to fix this anyway: [insert explanation here]" "You're right. We messed up, but there is nothing we can do. Here is what we will do to prevent this in the future: [insert plan here]" "You're right. We messed up, and here is how we are going to fix it and prevent issues in the future: [insert plan here]" "We're just some new college grads who have no idea how to run a business and we're in over our heads. We're not going to address your concerns." I kind of got the second one, minus the "clear" aspect. But if there is no desire for constructive criticism here, I'll go away and let you get back to burying your heads in the sand. |
|
|
|
I lost coins because I mistakenly put confidence in the dev team and planned to hold this coin long-term, and therefore didn't concern myself with the daily minutiae. On what basis do you claim there was no problem with communication? I see people repeating that, but there is never any actual support offered. I have explained why I think the communication was deficient several times. Please explain how they are justified in not putting a message in the OP reading, "Once the 1.6M CAIx currently available for exchange have been exhausted there will be no more. Exchange your CAI ASAP or they may become worthless!"
+100500!!! I had hoped that CAI is long-term perspective, and therefore do not need to continually check that there have decided once again to make developers. It turns out in vain. We had to constantly read the forum that you would not accidentally robbed. So, when you invest your money in something you don't check the status of investment anymore? Good thinking...!!! How often do you check the detailed status of the companies in your 401k? My strategy for investment in cryptocurrency involves holding a diverse portfolio long-term. This means that I'm occasionally unaware of pools that are down and other such things, but I shouldn't generally have to worry that the devs of a coin I am mining have made a conscious decision to bring its value to zero overnight. |
|
|
|
@klopper
I am sorry but I expect a response from TheStuhlman.
Other people think like me that the communication wasn’t good!
I call complete and utter BS on that. The communication from Stuhlman was great and the only people who whine are people who intentionally mined until the very end in order get coins on low difficulty and you guys now come here, blaming the developer who did everything in his powers to make this transition as smooth as possible. I don't disagree that Sthulman's communication was good - It was simply misleading and easy to misread or not follow exactly what was happening. I (incorrectly) assumed that mining would stop once the 1.6 million had been mined and that we could then exchange our coins. At no point was it mentioned (that I recall) that there was the possibility that 1 in 5 coins would not be available for exchange. I could have forgiven maybe 2-3% of coins to make up for lost wallets etc, but 20% is an enormous number. This is what SHOULD have been communicated and the pools SHOULD have been shut down OR the block reward changed to ZERO to prevent this. There were plenty of ways this could have been prevented. TheStuhlman can't force pools to close operations. Stop blaming everybody else and take a long look in the mirror. It's your fault and nobody else's and there was nothing misleading in the announcement. Learn to take responsibility for your own action or inaction. 1) We are taking responsibility by calling them out. I have not asked for anything except an explanation and doubt I'll even get that. 2) That cuts both ways. The devs here are supposed to be the professionals, and we are just consumers. They need to take responsibility for their crap communication that screwed over their own supporters. I have pointed out that neither the website nor the OP clearly stated that the ability to exchange CAI for CAIx would stop. I have not yet seen any of the supporters of this transition dispute that fact. The devs say they can't put updates about every little development in those locations without completely flooding them. This is true, but we are not talking about a little development. There is currently a great deal of fluff in their announcements about future announcements in the OP; this is taking up way more space than they ever devoted to explaining how the transition would work. They could put those details all over the internet and on TV and in newspapers--but if they are missing from what should be the two primary sources of crucial information on the coin, then they have failed their supporters. Now that I see what the transition plan actually was, I can't get past the view that it was either extraordinarily poorly planned, or extraordinarily dishonest. They knew that a substantial portion of the coins mined would be trash in the end--and an even higher portion of those mined toward the end would be useless. Are they so naive as to believe that people were just going to be cool with throwing away those coins (poor planning)? Or did they know that people wouldn't like it and therefore decided to downplay that aspect of the transition (dishonest)? It really has to be one or the other. They passed 1.6M around 5/8, so everything mined in the last 10 days was essentially worthless. Even if the communication had been perfect, you would still end up with a mad scramble to exchange coins before they ran out, and some of their supporters would get screwed. How is such a plan defensible? One of the biggest challenges facing cryptocurrency in general is making it suitable for the masses. If anybody thinks that a coin is going to succeed if its devs can't even communicate this kind of fundamental information to a very tech savvy (relative to the general population) base of supporters, I think you are sorely mistaken. There were aprox 300k of the 400k premine coins that did not get converted to caix. There was plenty of coins available and no problem with communication. You lost coins because you did not pay attention to your investment. I lost coins because I mistakenly put confidence in the dev team and planned to hold this coin long-term, and therefore didn't concern myself with the daily minutiae. On what basis do you claim there was no problem with communication? I see people repeating that, but there is never any actual support offered. I have explained why I think the communication was deficient several times. Please explain how they are justified in not putting a message in the OP reading, "Once the 1.6M CAIx currently available for exchange have been exhausted there will be no more. Exchange your CAI ASAP or they may become worthless!" I did make that statement on OP and on thread and on twitter several times, it was even published in articles about crypto. However, I do understand that some people missed out and miners kept on taking what is available. If you PM me your wallet address and the amount of coins you have, I will confirm that it existed before the 18. I will put my rigs on the multipool and mine CAIx and replace for you. There was no lack of communication at all when it came to this transition, we made an announcement after announcement about it. But like I said, I will make the best effort to make sure no one loses his CAI that they had before the 18. The 1.6 Million CAIx are now in circulation and I can not just make more. Some people will continue to mine CAI and come back and ask for more CAIx, I can not help them. But like I said if you had coins before the 18 I will help you recover them by mining it for you on the multipool at my expense, just pm me your wallet address and I will check on the explorer if they existed before the 18. That's all I can do, I can not make more CAIx so people can keep mining CAI for ever and replace them. Before CAIx project I ran pools and we ran into problems with some coins where we lost coins because of a bad client that crashed or a bad setup that caused double payouts etc.. I have never asked miners to cover the loss I have always covered those from my rigs and pool fees. I have built my pool reputation on everyone getting what they mine, and every pool I ever built was a total success. First, I would like to thank you for trying to do what you can to remedy the situation. However, it is the principle of the matter much more than the ~$25 worth of CAIx that concerns me. You are essentially running a publicly held corporation, and I think that I, a shareholder, have raised some valid concerns. Maybe I missed something on the front page; I'm not infallible. But nothing I remember seeing there clearly stated that there would be 1.6M available to exchange and that some mined coins would be left out. The text I saw in the OP left me with the impression that mining would be stopped once there were 1.6M distributed through mining. Yes, some further investigation on my part would have turned up information to the contrary; but I've made the point repeatedly that your users shouldn't have to dig for that kind of crucial information. To me, it points to poor management of the project, which has impacts broader than just this one issue. Hopefully either I missed something (I stated this as a possibility from the start, but have not yet been shown any evidence that the crucial details were in the prominent places where I would expect them) or this is just an issue of a PR gaffe made by a tech-oriented team (which would be understandable and not a major cause for concern in general). I would also still be interested to know how the dev team possibly failed to foresee the issue of some miners being left out in the cold. As I mentioned previously, even with perfect communication, this plan guaranteed that someone got screwed at least a little bit. |
|
|
|
@klopper
I am sorry but I expect a response from TheStuhlman.
Other people think like me that the communication wasn’t good!
I call complete and utter BS on that. The communication from Stuhlman was great and the only people who whine are people who intentionally mined until the very end in order get coins on low difficulty and you guys now come here, blaming the developer who did everything in his powers to make this transition as smooth as possible. I don't disagree that Sthulman's communication was good - It was simply misleading and easy to misread or not follow exactly what was happening. I (incorrectly) assumed that mining would stop once the 1.6 million had been mined and that we could then exchange our coins. At no point was it mentioned (that I recall) that there was the possibility that 1 in 5 coins would not be available for exchange. I could have forgiven maybe 2-3% of coins to make up for lost wallets etc, but 20% is an enormous number. This is what SHOULD have been communicated and the pools SHOULD have been shut down OR the block reward changed to ZERO to prevent this. There were plenty of ways this could have been prevented. TheStuhlman can't force pools to close operations. Stop blaming everybody else and take a long look in the mirror. It's your fault and nobody else's and there was nothing misleading in the announcement. Learn to take responsibility for your own action or inaction. 1) We are taking responsibility by calling them out. I have not asked for anything except an explanation and doubt I'll even get that. 2) That cuts both ways. The devs here are supposed to be the professionals, and we are just consumers. They need to take responsibility for their crap communication that screwed over their own supporters. I have pointed out that neither the website nor the OP clearly stated that the ability to exchange CAI for CAIx would stop. I have not yet seen any of the supporters of this transition dispute that fact. The devs say they can't put updates about every little development in those locations without completely flooding them. This is true, but we are not talking about a little development. There is currently a great deal of fluff in their announcements about future announcements in the OP; this is taking up way more space than they ever devoted to explaining how the transition would work. They could put those details all over the internet and on TV and in newspapers--but if they are missing from what should be the two primary sources of crucial information on the coin, then they have failed their supporters. Now that I see what the transition plan actually was, I can't get past the view that it was either extraordinarily poorly planned, or extraordinarily dishonest. They knew that a substantial portion of the coins mined would be trash in the end--and an even higher portion of those mined toward the end would be useless. Are they so naive as to believe that people were just going to be cool with throwing away those coins (poor planning)? Or did they know that people wouldn't like it and therefore decided to downplay that aspect of the transition (dishonest)? It really has to be one or the other. They passed 1.6M around 5/8, so everything mined in the last 10 days was essentially worthless. Even if the communication had been perfect, you would still end up with a mad scramble to exchange coins before they ran out, and some of their supporters would get screwed. How is such a plan defensible? One of the biggest challenges facing cryptocurrency in general is making it suitable for the masses. If anybody thinks that a coin is going to succeed if its devs can't even communicate this kind of fundamental information to a very tech savvy (relative to the general population) base of supporters, I think you are sorely mistaken. There were aprox 300k of the 400k premine coins that did not get converted to caix. There was plenty of coins available and no problem with communication. You lost coins because you did not pay attention to your investment. I lost coins because I mistakenly put confidence in the dev team and planned to hold this coin long-term, and therefore didn't concern myself with the daily minutiae. On what basis do you claim there was no problem with communication? I see people repeating that, but there is never any actual support offered. I have explained why I think the communication was deficient several times. Please explain how they are justified in not putting a message in the OP reading, "Once the 1.6M CAIx currently available for exchange have been exhausted there will be no more. Exchange your CAI ASAP or they may become worthless!" |
|
|
|
@klopper
I am sorry but I expect a response from TheStuhlman.
Other people think like me that the communication wasn’t good!
I call complete and utter BS on that. The communication from Stuhlman was great and the only people who whine are people who intentionally mined until the very end in order get coins on low difficulty and you guys now come here, blaming the developer who did everything in his powers to make this transition as smooth as possible. I don't disagree that Sthulman's communication was good - It was simply misleading and easy to misread or not follow exactly what was happening. I (incorrectly) assumed that mining would stop once the 1.6 million had been mined and that we could then exchange our coins. At no point was it mentioned (that I recall) that there was the possibility that 1 in 5 coins would not be available for exchange. I could have forgiven maybe 2-3% of coins to make up for lost wallets etc, but 20% is an enormous number. This is what SHOULD have been communicated and the pools SHOULD have been shut down OR the block reward changed to ZERO to prevent this. There were plenty of ways this could have been prevented. TheStuhlman can't force pools to close operations. Stop blaming everybody else and take a long look in the mirror. It's your fault and nobody else's and there was nothing misleading in the announcement. Learn to take responsibility for your own action or inaction. 1) We are taking responsibility by calling them out. I have not asked for anything except an explanation and doubt I'll even get that. 2) That cuts both ways. The devs here are supposed to be the professionals, and we are just consumers. They need to take responsibility for their crap communication that screwed over their own supporters. I have pointed out that neither the website nor the OP clearly stated that the ability to exchange CAI for CAIx would stop. I have not yet seen any of the supporters of this transition dispute that fact. The devs say they can't put updates about every little development in those locations without completely flooding them. This is true, but we are not talking about a little development. There is currently a great deal of fluff in their announcements about future announcements in the OP; this is taking up way more space than they ever devoted to explaining how the transition would work. They could put those details all over the internet and on TV and in newspapers--but if they are missing from what should be the two primary sources of crucial information on the coin, then they have failed their supporters. Now that I see what the transition plan actually was, I can't get past the view that it was either extraordinarily poorly planned, or extraordinarily dishonest. They knew that a substantial portion of the coins mined would be trash in the end--and an even higher portion of those mined toward the end would be useless. Are they so naive as to believe that people were just going to be cool with throwing away those coins (poor planning)? Or did they know that people wouldn't like it and therefore decided to downplay that aspect of the transition (dishonest)? It really has to be one or the other. They passed 1.6M around 5/8, so everything mined in the last 10 days was essentially worthless. Even if the communication had been perfect, you would still end up with a mad scramble to exchange coins before they ran out, and some of their supporters would get screwed. How is such a plan defensible? One of the biggest challenges facing cryptocurrency in general is making it suitable for the masses. If anybody thinks that a coin is going to succeed if its devs can't even communicate this kind of fundamental information to a very tech savvy (relative to the general population) base of supporters, I think you are sorely mistaken. |
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me what the rationale is for only providing enough CAIx to exchange about 80% of the supply of CAI that was mined?
I have been mining this along with a number of other currencies and don't have the free time to read every thread post for every coin in its entirety. I was relying largely on updates to the website and OP for information on exchanging CAI for CAIx. I think that if there was going to be a hard deadline on making one-to-one exchanges, it should have been in the OP and in bigger, bolder lettering than the nearly meaningless updates. Scanning through the posts, I would see a lot of discussion about CAI mining ending, but relatively little mention of the game of musical chairs that we were apparently playing.
In the end, I only spent a few dollars worth of electricity to get CAI that were worth something like $25 last time I checked--so this isn't the end of the world. But I think it's worth mentioning that this doesn't seem to have been handled very well (unless I'm missing something, which I very well might be).
I sympathise, but if you're going to hold a coin, you should pay more attention to what's going on with it. I mean, c'mon, alts are volatile - one day they're hot, the next day they're worse than worthless... if you don't keep a close eye on your coins, you're asking for trouble one way or another. CAI to CAIx exchange has been mentioned loads of times on this thread, on Twitter and has been written about on crypto news sites... there was plenty of time to switch. Unfortunate timing. Had you been a day earlier, you'd be fine. No, the volatility is exactly the reason to diversify and ignore the day-to-day news. If you are trading them based on the breaking news on crypto news sites, you're asking for trouble. The details of the CAI to CAIx exchange may have been mentioned in many other places. But it was absent from the two places where it should have been clearly explained. |
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me what the rationale is for only providing enough CAIx to exchange about 80% of the supply of CAI that was mined?
I have been mining this along with a number of other currencies and don't have the free time to read every thread post for every coin in its entirety. I was relying largely on updates to the website and OP for information on exchanging CAI for CAIx. I think that if there was going to be a hard deadline on making one-to-one exchanges, it should have been in the OP and in bigger, bolder lettering than the nearly meaningless updates. Scanning through the posts, I would see a lot of discussion about CAI mining ending, but relatively little mention of the game of musical chairs that we were apparently playing.
In the end, I only spent a few dollars worth of electricity to get CAI that were worth something like $25 last time I checked--so this isn't the end of the world. But I think it's worth mentioning that this doesn't seem to have been handled very well (unless I'm missing something, which I very well might be).
We made way over the current supply at the time we started this transition process. CAI mined was about 800k when we started with this switch, the amount we set CAIx was about 1.6 million CAIx. So there was plenty of time to switch all CAI. We also said mining will continue till all the 1.6 Million CAIx have been exchanged so if we only made 80% no mining could have been done. You made 80% of the total amount mined; the supply at the time you started the transition process is irrelevant for anything except use as a baseline from which to estimate future supply. You set the time at which mining was to close, which should have allowed you to make a pretty accurate estimate of how many coins would be out there. It sounds like you must have expected mining to end considerably sooner, which also points to poor planning. You said mining would continue until all 1.6 million had been exchanged--but that is not the same as saying that you will not exchange for the remainder of the CAI after that. Why would people continue mining as the 1.6 million mark closed in and the possibility of not being able to exchange coins became more likely? I can't help but wonder whether the poor communication of this point was intentional to some extent in order to retain an adequate supply of miners through the transition. |
|
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me what the rationale is for only providing enough CAIx to exchange about 80% of the supply of CAI that was mined?
I have been mining this along with a number of other currencies and don't have the free time to read every thread post for every coin in its entirety. I was relying largely on updates to the website and OP for information on exchanging CAI for CAIx. I think that if there was going to be a hard deadline on making one-to-one exchanges, it should have been in the OP and in bigger, bolder lettering than the nearly meaningless updates. Scanning through the posts, I would see a lot of discussion about CAI mining ending, but relatively little mention of the game of musical chairs that we were apparently playing.
In the end, I only spent a few dollars worth of electricity to get CAI that were worth something like $25 last time I checked--so this isn't the end of the world. But I think it's worth mentioning that this doesn't seem to have been handled very well (unless I'm missing something, which I very well might be).
|
|
|
|
|
