Fully agree about Guldencoin. It's a great coin and is an example to every country coin of how to go about things. They were working hard and adding merchants when the price was in the toilet and the team have been engaged and dedicated throughout. They now have 50 merchants accepting Gulden from kids clothes to coffee shops and new merchants are being contacted and added all the time.

I like the look of SLG at face value but I'd like to see more merchants come online before I invest. I wouldn't be too worried about the price for the moment though. The good country coins have enormous potential to the upside over the medium term IMO.

I'd like to ask what is being done to bring more merchants in? Are new potential merchants being contacted regularly?

I wonder if the SLG team have a template that could be released to the community so we could contact merchants ourselves with full details of SLG and how to accept payments easily.

Wow. What a powerful story! It's like the book of Job. The going ons in Europe also sound highly suspicious. 

I honestly feel FIBRELITE can work if implemented as a slave to the master.

Please people, get your facts together and stop trying to spread something that is not true. I openly admit I use multiple accounts, and if you had half a brain you would look at the post from each and honestly see that my position was the same on both and actually signed my name to the other. Why the hell would I be trying to create FUD on a coin I heavily invest and have supported. Read my history on both accounts, I beg of you, to understand more of my position. I do not want a second coin and this is not just me. You cannot just "ban" someone because they have multiple accounts because there is "no rule" that prevents that from going on. If I pretended to be someone else with a different position, I could see your view, but this is not the case. I was only trying to see if it was possible to vote under a different account in order for me to trust the results of the poll. Seriously, this community is suppose to be adult based and it's started to show cracks. Let's just move on please.

wnw

OK putting on my financial engineer hat, because I think we can do better than donations.  My suggested structure follows, which meets the goal of raising money, without hurting current investors or creating some unworkable two coin structure (i.e. hurt current investors...):

Hello sir, I think you have raised some important points in your earlier post. As you explicitly allowed comments on this post, please consider my red remarks as an opportunity for a conversation and not as a confrontation. From what you have wrote earlier I consider this is not the case.

1) Fibrelite is a new coin, that Fibre holders are able to convert to.  Fibre will cease to exist some period after the conversion. -Why should Fibre cease to exist?

2) "Baseline" # of coins in Fibrelite is the same as Fibre and Fibre holders can convert 1:1.  Thus there is no dilution -My nondilution theory tells me that 1 Fibre should be 90 mil/650,000=138,46 Fibrelight if they were to merge.
2a) But now you say then no money is raised, so what is the point- that's why we need both the coins, but with the current holders having 90+% percent of the total supply of FibreLight and 10% being left for the ICO. This is when the wallet with two currencies also comes in place (I'm sure I'm not the first one sugessting it but I think it would be a premiere in crypto)

3) "Upside" # of coins in Fibrelite are the ICO.  Selling price is whatever the price of Fibre is at the start of the ICO (or some average over the last X days, whatever).  However many BTC come in from the ICO dictate how many "Upside" coins get actually released, the remaining unsold coins are burned.  Maybe some BTC target is set, but the key point is the unsold coins (if any) are burned.

4) Net result is that the value of Fibre holdings = value of fibrelite holdings in BTC for current fibre investors (because price is the same and # of coins held by individual investors are the same), but since new coins are sold in the fibrelite ICO, devs get the money they need to maximally execute on their awesome plans.

Comments / criticisms?  Let me know if any of that was unclear.  May need some tweaking but I think this is straightforwardly feasible from a tech perspective and best achieves everyone's objective.  



From a communication perspective, maybe you say something like the following:

1) Fibre is a great coin, and the worst case is that we continue to develop aggressively to grow and meet our goals

2) But we have even greater goals to create value for investors that we can execute on with new funding

3) Therefore we are considering a "v2" upgraded Fibre, ie. Fibrelite, which would have an ICO to provide that funding

4) We are 100% committed to not only protecting Fibre investors, but making sure they as early supporters get all the same upside in Fibrelite, which we think will be even greater for them than if we simply stay on the current course and develop fibre only (which is an option, but not one we think is the best)

5) To achieve (4), the ICO will have the same coin price as fibre, and new coins will only be created pro rata to new invested BTC coming in.  Fibrelite will also benefit, because potential investors will know our level of commitment in return for their support -
Maybe say that or maybe prove it first, as in the developers should first show that they can be trusted with a 1000 BTC/year revenue.

jai meme pas répondue, ca vaux meme pas la paine , évidements ils comprends rien... pardon mon français, c'est pas mas premiere langue mais je comprend tout

salut, comme déjà dis plus haut, cette pièce est perdu.
ico à 12, bien et après ? quel avantage à part le wallet aucun, c'est très bien d'avoir un beau wallet, mais franchement, tout le monde s'en fout hein !
je ne mine pas pour avoir un beau wallet mais un pour un wallet qui me rapporte quelque chose.
vous pouvez bien dire ce que vous voulez, bla bla bla, j'ais ouvert mon wallet une fois, juste pour voir mes coins, le reste je m'en fout !
si dev veux faire du profit qu'il trouve un algorithme qui ne flambe pas avec 30 ghz ! comme "ioc" alors la nous pourrons miner !
j'ais miné quelques heures pour 17 neos et je regrette.
vous vous engagez sur des terrains inconnu à coups de bitcoins., vous me faites rires.
 

i point my miners to mining rig rentals (mark them as unavailable if you dont want to rent them out) then i switch all miners with 1 click from home or from my smartphone using their 5 pool 1 click switch setup.
There are other programs/ways to do it but this is one way.
Takes a few minutes in total daily.

I will post hashrates for different difficultys like 3 millions and 26 million later, compare yourself see if its worth mining 24/7.
Maybe 90% of SHA blocks is produced during just an hour or two during the day.
I just check difficulty, if its dropping i repoint at 12 millon or so then 20 minutes later when the dip is over and it is up at 10 millions or so i mine something else.
So do 90%+ of NEOS SHA miners atm, those that mine 24/7 are just fools waisting energy.
Mine 90% BTC/whatever and 10% NEOS (in time) each day and you make easy 2-3 times as many NEOS.
+ your buy support counteracts the constant dumping by the multipools/large rig owners with no intention on holding.
The whole 5 minute block time and 25%+ up and down goes fucking bananas each time a SHA block gets stuck at 26 million + for a few hours and it gets stuck
cause 90% of miners jump in/out.
F:ex a 10 NEOS block reward and 1 minute block time would give all algos a stable difficulty.
Now its just down to repoint your mining gear or your rental rig at the right time of the day and it will remain like that until NEOS exchange
value motivates a 200-300TH/S 24/7 steady hashrate not 10% 24/7 and 90% peak as it is at the moment.

what he is saying is flatout lies
http://www.verters.com/mining-breakdown/neoscoin
if you scroll down you can see the breakdown of the last blocks found and the percent of each algo from the whole that found the block. as you can clearly see, the 'sha' algo is not 'raping' anything, and the 3 algos are working quite well.