 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
We deliver a software product. You do know that Apple, one of biggest companies in the world, brings out patch releases for their software all the time. That's because that is the nature of a software product. We are doing our best here. Furthermore you bought a product still in beta. We provided a free demo version for you to try out before you buy it too so there is really no excuse not to know what you are buying into.
We have put thousands upon thousands of hours into delivering a trading terminal for the cryptocurrency space. The first true trading terminal. We have to deal with new exchanges that cannot handle increased trading volumes and deliver unreliable responses through their APIs. And unlike many of our competitors we don't only have to handle this, but we deliver a native desktop application with an advanced GUI. It's hard work.
We are a small startup working our asses off over here so perhaps cut us a little slack.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
This may actually encourage you to think again and honor the Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime access service agreement that you entered into with customers after they accepted your invite to treat. Did you honestly think that everyone would just lay down and accept that their product will be essentially locked up against their wishes, renamed, then sold again as a different product? Why should any customer cut you some slack when you have essentially told them you are abandoning the contract you entered into with them at the point of sale? Then have the cheek to ask them for more funds for a subscription to a service that they already have a lifetime contract for? Are you serious? Leave the guy alone. He doesn't need to cut anyone slack and I certainly hope he and others like him pursue remedy to the fullest extent of the law. Whilst your product is innovative and a great addition to the crypto trading world, it's far from perfect and needs lots of work to bring it to a professional level. Many have noted this and many more have helped you on your way by supporting your software that, at times, has acted like an early beta. We have persevered and supported you the whole way, we have demoed your product and then seen what it's weaknesses and strong points are, we have bought a license to use your software on exchanges for life and we have done so believing that our contract will not be compromised by greed and a huge legal oversight on your part. We have even referred other customers to this service and you have benefited from the increased customer base this has created. The service on your web site clearly offers access to a number of exchanges for life through your software trading terminal, this contract still stands for existing customers and anyone that purchases through that same invite to treat web page and this contract cannot be simply disregarded. You don't need to maintain two different code bases. One will do, incorporating the existing customer's lifetime service model and the new customer's subscription model. It's not hard to see that this is the right thing to do. Do you want your company to fail instantly when everyone complains about this or do you want to do the right thing and stay afloat? The choice is yours ultimately. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.
Extremes:
1. Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2. Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.
My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.
Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.
1. In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2. Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3. Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.
I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.
Option 2, keeping the existing customers happy with the lifetime product they purchased and renaming it Margin and changing the business model for new customers only, whilst still maintaining a decent profit from new customers would be the way we would expect things to go and seems the most logical step for Margin Software to take seeing as they can't take residual percentages of trades from their customers by German law. This would keep the company making decent money from every new customer and their continued subscription whilst not alienating it's existing customers. However, Jonathan has already said that this is something that he is neither interested in or willing to discuss as a viable option. He's made his decision clear to make the Leonardo name redundant and try to take everyone's purchase value with it. The product itself has not been made redundant, just the name. It's akin to making an employee redundant, but then taking on another employee to fulfill exactly the same or similar role under a different title and using it as an excuse to dismiss the original employee without any form of compensation, effectively washing their hands of the situation and starting afresh without considering the implications. The position must truly become redundant for it to be legal. Taking on a different employee to fulfill the role under a different title and dismissing a previous employee who did a same or similar job and calling it a redundancy is illegal. One can't make a person redundant, it must be the position and job that has been made redundant for a business to justify it. Considering Leonardo's/Margin's position as a trading terminal with automatic trading features has not changed, it stands to reason that any purchase made for the lifetime licence would be subject to a contract of sale that Margin Software automatically entered into at that point. This contract would transcend any rename, proxying or other form of rebranding designed to cheat the customer out of their rightful licence to use a functioning piece of reasonably bug free and API specific software on 7 exchanges for life. Margin Software can't legally just expect to wash the company's hands of their responsibilities under such contract of sale and expect people to take it laying down. There are laws preventing this. You sold a lifetime service and simply saying you won't honor that service contract due to a rebrand does not absolve you of your responsibilities under contract law. This product is not end of life at all, it's practical position has not been made redundant, Jonathan has just made our purchases redundant under the Leonardo banner, yet still thinks it's alright to charge subscriptions to everyone who's already purchased a Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime license, in effect offering the exact same product on a subscription only basis but renamed. It's shocking that Jonathan has to perpetuate this lie when all he has to do is appologise to his Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime license customer base and promise the that their lifetime licence will be honored and perpetuate through the transition to the Margin titled product and allow them to keep using it unhindered, with regular updates to keep it functional on no less than 7 exchanges of the customer's choosing. This would not be hard to accomplish and would not change the current model he is proposing for new customers to be on a subscription based model rather than a lifetime purchase. The two can happily co-exist and with his original veteran customers still suggesting improvements, offering that valuable feedback so that his new customers can benefit and whist still gaining ample subscription revenue to keep the company afloat. Surely the original customers are the people who are most familiar with Leonardo and are the ones that Jonathan should be keeping happy so that he can rest assured, knowing any feedback that comes from them will improve the product and keep the new subscriptions rolling in? Do us Lifetime licence holders have to band together and create the European equivalent of a class action lawsuit for you to reconsider the veteran customers of yours? It seems so. Anyone interested in doing so should feel free to post without prejudice and collaborate. I'm sure quite a few would be interested in this case. Jonathan and the Leonardo team are welcome to our Discord for an interview at any time, given reasonable notice. It would be interesting to see what Margin Software think of their veteran base of Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime licence customers and the valuable feedback that they have provided throughout this product's development. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
"Your customers" => no, just you...
I beg to differ... Oops. EDIT! Yes, Thanks for the support! Another frustrated customer maybe ? Advertising as an 'invite to treat' Leonardo Lifetime Access to 7 exchanges means exactly that, lifetime access to 7 exchanges through Leonardo, without compromise. I would be interested to see where anyone can argue against this. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
I took this ongoing tirade as a personal affront. The moderator has been notified. You're welcome to your own opinions, however I do not believe anything I have said is incorrect or untrue. I stand by my observations. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Wow, Aggressive! I guess the truth really does hurt! Now I can see that you do not treat your customers with the professional courtesy that any reputable company should.
Who would want to do business with you and buy into your bait and switch subscriptions if you're going to disrespectfully treat your customers this way? Your attitude here has dictated what will happen to your company next. It doesn't look promising.
"Your customers" => no, just you, because this is becoming trolling from your part. If you read this thread you'll see that they are nice, honest and fair with most of the customers. I don't have anything to gain personally by defending Margin, but I believe in fairness: if a business behaves badly, I always complain (but don't troll like yourself); however, if it has a record of good practices, I'll also stand to defend them. This subject of the business model change has been discussed to the exhaustion now. What's tricky about trolling is that people feel compelled to reply, but it just serves its purpose. Maybe I also contributed with this reply, but thought it was important given the strong words you're using, and don't plan to continue replying anyway. That's ok. Everyone is entitled to use their observational skills as they see fit. This however doesn't change that fact that Margin have made a bad call for existing customers. It's absolutely fine to change a business model to generate more income from future prospective customers but not: at the detriment of existing paid up customers. building a customer base on the promise that they can access 7 exchanges for a lifetime and then removing that purchase without any form of compensation that will put the customer in exactly the same position as they were before the bait and switch announcement. refusing to maintain the current software and instead asking them to pay (even a reduced rate) for subscription for a product they have already purchased as a lifetime product that's been renamed to make it look like a new product. making a product name redundant but then providing the exact same functionality with a product that just has a new name but is functionally identical to the product that is supposedly made redundant and has already been purchased in a lifetime package. It's immoral an unethical no matter how you look at it. One can't make something redundant if it still exists in it's same practical capacity with just a different name. That's just daylight robbery. I'm not trolling here. I'm just presenting the facts and it stands to reason that existing customers should get exactly what they paid for, lifetime access to 7 exchanges through Leonardo which dictates that Leonardo must be maintained to accommodate APIs on exchanges when they change, otherwise how can this be described as Leonardo access to 7 exchanges for life if that access is broken? This is not a troll. This is a serious question that still has not been answered to anyone's satisfaction. Jonathan seems to just stick his middle finger up to anyone who challenges him with a valid complaint about this terminology and his word play. Will you do the same ? Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
You say I've have had updates for the best part of 2 years. How is May 2017 2 years since my lifetime purchase? I think your maths is just a little bit skewed there. Get my maths right? You get another year FREE on margin. Are you the same person that posted this earlier today? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3082921.msg31821348#msg31821348I purchased it long ago and have never once looked back. Oh, and this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3082921.msg31816095#msg31816095I have also used this trading terminal successfully since last year and I have never experienced any inadequacies. The interface is amazing and simple enough to manage many exchanges and see at a glance where you are with any trade, current or historic. It is simply good at what it does and now very stable after plenty of improvements and optimisations. Or did someone hack your account? Yes, get your maths right. I was referring to Leonardo which I have had for less than 10 months and now you say it's going to rebrand and no longer receive even the most basic API updates to keep it in line with Lifetime Access to 7 exchanges (and any API changes they make) that you advertised at the time of purchase. I'm not interested in your rebranded product as this isn't what I purchased and I was not referring to anything related to it what so ever, so yes, get your maths right, 10 months of Leonardo Lifetime 7 exchange access, not 2 years! I did purchase long ago and never look back. I had faith that you would address the issues with Leonardo running on Windows and with large page support that I reported which prevented me from using it on my machines for MONTHS. I attempted to use it in Linux but because that is not the OS I was using, nor interested in running Leonardo on, I waited for the fixes. I could see that Leonardo was a promising product and stable on other operating systems, hence the praise for your product. On this basis I posted in the other thread before seeing your diabolical bait and switch announcement. I even went so far as declining your offer of a refund based on the difficulties I described to you personally in email about Windows and Leonardo crashing regularly after using 1GB of memory and also the large pages in memory issue where Leonardo would refuse to run at all. I kept the product believing that I was safe in the thought that I would eventually be able to use your product on which I had lifetime access to 7 exchanges. You say am I the same person? Sure as hell I am! Just because I praise your product before discovering the underhanded product rebrand as an excuse to milk your already paid lifetime customers, doesn't mean I don't have a valid observation that your bait and switch is disgusting. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Fine, that sounds reasonable. I may check it out. Thanks.
I too have purchased Leonardo with the understanding that it would come with a lifetime support. But situations change. That model would not have allowed them to survive which means lifetime support is meaningless. So they have come up with an alternative pricing plan, but with some perks for existing customers. I'm fine with that. It's pretty harsh to call that a 'bait and switch'.
I don't believe it's harsh at all. That's exactly what it is! Should Jonathan have honored the lifetime customers and just started charging new customers the subscription model, this would have served his business just as well. Now he has just alienated a lot of his loyal 'beta testers', eh-hem, "Hero" customers, just so that they can do all the hard work of experiencing glitches, bugs and inadequacies, lose money on trades stuck whilst Leonardo crashes and then shaft them for the effort of reporting all those things so that he can fix them for a subscription model rebrand. It's a clear bait and switch. Bullcrap. Enough of your time wasting Rapturoso. Jonathan Wow, Aggressive! I guess the truth really does hurt! Now I can see that you do not treat your customers with the professional courtesy that any reputable company should. Who would want to do business with you and buy into your bait and switch subscriptions if you're going to disrespectfully treat your customers this way? Your attitude here has dictated what will happen to your company next. It doesn't look promising. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Fine, that sounds reasonable. I may check it out. Thanks.
I too have purchased Leonardo with the understanding that it would come with a lifetime support. But situations change. That model would not have allowed them to survive which means lifetime support is meaningless. So they have come up with an alternative pricing plan, but with some perks for existing customers. I'm fine with that. It's pretty harsh to call that a 'bait and switch'.
I don't believe it's harsh at all. That's exactly what it is! Should Jonathan have honored the lifetime customers and just started charging new customers the subscription model, this would have served his business just as well. Now he has just alienated a lot of his loyal 'beta testers', eh-hem, "Hero" customers, just so that they can do all the hard work of experiencing glitches, bugs and inadequacies, lose money on trades stuck whilst Leonardo crashes and then shaft them for the effort of reporting all those things so that he can fix them for a subscription model rebrand. It's a clear bait and switch. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Please... Stop complaining in this thread, it's been going long enough. I've been in the software industry longer than most of you, so I can say I've seen fair share of what happened over the recent history. Not everything is fair in this world and when there are differences in arguments between two parties, PLEASE look at them from both side's perspectives. Hopefully it will be easier to understand the conflicting situation after that.
How do you know if there are better options than this FOR ME? I would think I'd know how to evaluate products that suit me. And I have looked at more than a few now. You are just declaring a war against them and trying to scrape existing customers away from them. I don't like that strategy. If you don't like software or their support, fine I can respect that. But please don't go any further than that.
I like supporting local economy for consumables. Similarly, I like supporting small startups started by younger people with ideas, passion and drives, even if they make mistakes.
That's my 2c.
I don't know if there are better options for you and I never promised I could offer you that over at Crypto Play Radio, it's just a suggestion and I said our members were looking into viable alternatives. Also we do not have a product to lure people away from Margin Software with. All we talk about in the Discord is crypto and anything new on the scene. This bait and switch that Margin Software have done with Leonardo has become a hot topic because of the controversial nature of shafting lifetime customers and knocking them down to actually owning nothing of worth, even after purchasing the promised lifetime 7 exchange access package. What's the good of having 7 exchanges for lifetime access if the access doesn't work, if they break or don't work for any reason like API changes? It's made our purchase pointless. If on the other hand you would actually like to chat about anything crypto related, our Discord is filled with people with all different views of course. Hope to see you there :-) Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Jonathan, I currently own a license just for Bittrex. The idea was to test on Bittrex first then see what happens.
Now, I need Binance support as well quite badly. But I'm not quite sure what is the right direction right now since you are in the middle of switching the platform. Does it make sense to get a license for Leonardo on Binance right now or should I wait? My intention is to try out the new subscription model as well but I would need both Bittrex and Binance support.
Thank you.
Well now that Jonathan has announced that he will disregard the valid complaints of his loyal customers, there are better options that us at Crypto Play Radio Discord are reviewing. If you want to come and have a chat there, we can offer something much better than Leonardo/Margin now that Jonathan has essentially stuck the middle finger up to the sales contract he entered into with his customers when selling lifetime licenses for Leonardo. Our link for Discord is below. Just talk to Yopilax, Konsequence, Boberino or anyone else in the LIVE CHAT and radio_text channels and we will get some alternatives for you that you will be pleased with. Be patient as we do sometimes sleep and stay in channel :-P You will get a response when we wake. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
You believed? Well, there's a life lesson for you. Find me where we promised you that anywhere?
Read back through my previous posts. This was a decision we had to take. Otherwise there was every chance that we would have had to close up shop. You wouldn't get updates then either.
This is the only way to ensure a sustainable company.
Of course I believed your advertising on your site Jonathan. That's what it said on your website at the time of my purchase. If you happen to have changed it since then that's not my issue but yours. Wordplay doesn't absolve you from being responsible to your lifetime customers. Also when one buys lifetime access to software that promises access to 7 exchanges then that's what we expect, something that allows access for a lifetime and this dictates that the software be updated to allow us to do so. API changes on exchanges will render Leonardo useless so these issues need to be addressed if you want people to still be able to use their lifetime license and keep their software and be able to still use it. Simply keeping Leonardo isn't adequate. It must still be able to be used otherwise what's the point? It's like saying I can keep a Banana but expecting me to believe it's going to be edible years later. Ridiculous! Also don't be patronising by telling me I've learned a life lesson. When a company advertises 7 exchanges for lifetime use then that's what one should expect, not your disgraceful bait and switch. Fair enough, charge your new customers a subscription model but don't hold your older customers to ransom! You say I've have had updates for the best part of 2 years. How is May 2017 2 years since my lifetime purchase? I think your maths is just a little bit skewed there. If you remember correctly, I was complaining that Leonardo would completely refuse to run on machines with huge page support enabled. Obviously as Crypto traders there's a high probability that we will also be crypto miners and large pages in memory is required for cryptonight CPU mining. I also complained that Leonardo would crash after using just over 1GB of memory and generally keep crashing on Windows overnight. You said this was because it's not compiled the same on Windows as it is with Linux and Mac OS and it is related to being compiled for 32bit rather than 64 bit or something like that. Whatever it was, it doesn't work properly. So I patiently waited for you to fix this. To this day you say you have still not completed a fix. You still say the memory issue has not yet been fully resolved. I have been completely unable to use Leonardo until the first part of this year when 3.8 was released. I haven't even had a chance to get a return on investment with the purchase price in Bitcoin of Leonardo lifetime licence yet and you argue that shafting your existing customers is the only way to survive? Get real. I shall be now looking elsewhere for a solution that isn't going to screw me over less than a 10 months after purchase. I shall not be recommending Margin to anyone and instead I will be recommending against it. It;s not ready for prime time. What it can do right now is great but it is far from a professional product and by no means ready for a tiered subscription model either. There's just too much missing, even if you weren't rebranding to shaft your previous customers. Despicable. Suggestion, Don't rebrand and keep your lifetime customers happy and only charge new customers the subscription model, otherwise you're just going to lose customers with this unethical move. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Ok, Bait and switch your Hero customers? Really Jonathan? If we pay for lifetime 7 exchanges, that's what we should be getting! API updates included etc. I can understand why you'd start charging new customers for a subscription model on the rebrand, but COME ON! Rebrand the software to a new name and make this an excuse to be able to start charging your so called 'hero' customers? Even saying if we subscribe within a month of it running out we'll be eligable for a 50% discount on all future subscriptions is an affront to everyone who purchased your Ultimate lifetime package. I'm totally not happy and I also believed that you would honor the lifetime updates and improvements to keep Leonardo/Margin working for all your previous 'hero' customers. I think this is time for a personal email to you to see what you are prepared to do for previous customers. This is DISGUSTING. Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm |
|
|
|
Two weeks.  |
|
|
|
|
Hello Jonathan,
I'm enquiring as to the whereabouts of the new auto trading bots that were to be implemented in summer 2017. You did mention that you have some big plans for the summer but it's now fast approaching the new year of 2018 and no additional bots in sight.
I will take this opportunity to bring your attention to a long standing problem. Maybe you're fully aware of it but I will reiterate anyway as this is an issue that requires resolve ASAP. Leonardo appears to be fundamentally flawed where memory management is concerned. I see Leonardo starting at around 500MB of memory usage when it's first run and synchronised fully with 3 markets and 60 pairs spread across them. After a few hours this memory usage doubles to above 1GB and then crashes Leonardo completely, leaving hanging trades on exchanges and not completing cycles. On a restart and resynchronisation this memory usage falls back to around 500MB but soon reaches 1+GB and crashes again and again. How are we supposed to use this either on our workstations or on a VM unattended if this memory issue keeps killing it? This desperately needs attention as bloated memory use and poor management causing this software to fail is unacceptable.
Another issue that may be related to flawed memory management is the issue with huge page support. As you may know, many crypto traders also mine for crypto on their workstations and other machines. CryptoNight in particular requires that huge page support be enabled in the Windows policy editor so that the CryptoNight algorithm with CPU mining can perform at 100%, without huge page support mining is crippled to just over 60%. Leonardo appears completely broken for this and sometimes runs and then crashes soon after or often time just refuses to run altogether. This is another issue that requires urgent attention. Please respond to the community here as to your fix for these issues.
Thanks :-)
|
|
|
|
Just got this to work  it seems like it's working but ethos is not reporting the H/s? Not showing up in "show stats". Now easyhash.io is only showing me that I mined "x minutes" ago... Nothing is changing. It takes a while for the stats on ETHOS to show on the main page. Also when you use 'show miner' in the terminal it also reports correctly. There was an issue with my miner (which may not be related as I use nVidia GPUs) on ETHOS 1.2.4 where I had to inject the flags in the ETHOS config in this manner: globalminer ccminer # for pool use: stratumproxy enabled # for Nicehash use: # stratumproxy nicehash ccminer-flags -a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://[pool server]:[pool port] -u [ETN address] # proxypool [pool server]:[pool port] # proxywallet [ETN address] This was because on Nicehash ccminer would report that it tried to connect to Niceash and then the connection was rejected and on other pools ccminer would report that the address used was invalid. Injecting the flags as above got around this issue albeit in a hacky kind of way. I made some modifications to ETHOS 1.2.4 so I didn't want to lose them by upgrading to 1.2.5. I still have to add support for ccminer mods with better hashing performance. In the future I won't be using any proprietary software for hashing. EWBF is the only proprietary miner I have used and I'm still looking for an alternative for Equihash. For now though, ccminer appears to be hashing OK on CryptoNight. I may get better performance on CryptoNight by incorporating the ccminer mods but I'm in no rush. |
|
|
|
Just got this to work Electroneum globalminer sgminer-gm-xmr sgminer-gm-xmr=proxypool1 stratum+tcp://pool.electroneum.space:7777 sgminer-gm-xmr=proxypool2 stratum+tcp://pool.electroneum.space:7777 sgminer-gm-xmr=proxywallet your wallet here sgminer-gm-xmr=poolpass1 x sgminer-gm-xmr=poolpass2 x Remove worker from sgminer-gm-xmr.stub.conf { "pools": [{ "url": "POOL1", "user": "WALLET", "pass": "PASSWORD1" }, { "url": "POOL2", "user": "WALLET", "pass": "PASSWORD2" sorry no idea on nicehash WARNING: Do not use the pool listed above. The URL contains malware. Just go with the well known electroneum pools like easyhash.io, electroneum.fr, or even electroneum.hashparty.io. You won't be finding any blocks anyway if the pool hashrate is so low. Someone hasn't done their homework here. The pool offer a Miner page to mine directly from the browser without downloading and configuring any mining software. Simply providing an Electroneum address is supposed to pay any pool earnings to that wallet. You are most likely reacting to your anti-virus software alerts rather than responding to them appropriately. If you look you'll see that the malware you speak of is not malware at all but just a miner that the site operators have provided for ease of use. |
|
|
|
Or they just realized it was a lost cause
It doesn't help when all I do is ask for clarification of how to get the Burst wallet service working in Windows and then the lead developer bans me from their Discord for simply asking tecnical configuration questions, then follows me back into the old Burst Discord for yet another volley of abuse, telling me that I can't expect to be "spoon fed". I was patronised directly by the OP suggesting in the Discord that they should consider tolerating "users of that level" , essentially offering that I was somehow not an equal but rather, inferior. All I was asking for was info on hard pathing Java after the CMD file for the wallet service failed to find Java even before loading any config. Everyone else was helpful but the OP here decided to beat his chest and swing his ban hammer in a fit of intolerance and impatience. Maybe you're totally right UnZane. We will see I suppose. |
|
|
|
https://blocksuckernation.com this pool does not pay the earned coins, be careful, I have more than 4 days of output hanging. They are scammers !! Maybe go over to the Discord and try to resolve your issue with a legitimate paying pool before you start spreading FUD? There's plenty of payouts on this pool, with very little issues. Post your wallet address? Send an email? The help is there. Maybe you could have resolved your issues before assuming the worst and branding a fledgling beta pool as a scam.  Scooby is also in beta so why not talk with the pool owners before fearing the worst? |
|
|
|
|
I seem to be having issues that a lot of people running the latest wallet on page one of this thread are having. Surely there's a fix for this that someone is just not sharing right now?
Blocks remaining this morning after running the wallet for a few days non-stop:
440383
Blocks left approximately 30 minutes ago:
202553
Current last block received:
Sat May 20 18:13:27 2017
Current number of blocks:
37257
Estimated total number of blocks:
239810
I have populated the peers list with peers from a friend's peers file and he says it works fine for him and it is correctly synchronised with the block chain.
The wallet has been completely removed from my workstation along with the local user application data folder that is automatically created and I've also tried to re-synchronise from the genesis block on a fresh virgin copy of the wallet to no avail. It's also been installed on a separate virgin server, again to no avail.
Windows Firewall rules have been checked and they allow all access to the wallet. UPNP is on and the ports are accessible. There is no firewall interference. There are currently 21 active connections to the Sweepstake network.
I did however notice on both the workstation and server that the Sweepstake wallet has a high amount of banned peers. Is this normal?
So I'm left scratching my head as to why this works for some but not others. There are zero network restrictions in place, this is the first thing I checked with my ISP and my router, firewall hardware and Windows firewall software.
Any help would be much appreciated.
EDIT: There are now apparently 213814 blocks remaining. The number is increasing! This is ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
Crypto Play Radio sure is the place to be if you are into any crypto related stuff. Been there since the beginning and there's always something interesting being talked about. Pretty cool place :-)
|
|
|
|
|
