 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
First: Of course, Jango can be part of an economy. For it's own it's not an economy. And the problem is: Think about what would happen if the Neucoins on Jango would leave it to Bittrex. With other words: The supply on Jango shouldn't leave Jango because otherwise it would hurt the price. If I would be a musician there and let's say everybody loves me and all the 200,000 "Users" send me some Neucoins I would crash the market. And I don't say that Jango is a bad idea. It's the same problem I've mention again and again: The supply doesn't fit in any way to reality. The price reflects that and it's still too high.
Second: It's right not to expect that everything will be accomplished at once. But then again: Why start with a supply that would be worth over 50 Mio Dollar and monster-inflation and just 3.3% on the market while 97% sitting in the back, staking, and buying a project that is totally overvalued for years. It's as if you would give them a loan. You say: "Okay, I know it's not worth that much now but maybe in 2 or 3 years, so I hope you will deliver. Please take my money and make decisions I would agree with!". In fact that's what every Investor said who bought into the ICO. And if you take a look on the process since the ICO: Did they deliver? What I see is that they don't even really communicate! They don't do just the basic-work. They took the money and the biggest decisions they've made is to switch to full PoS (who is staking?) and to cut the total supply to increase the value (who wants to sell billions of Coins?).
You are right. If coins leave jango right now, most of them would get sold/traded. There will need to be other things to do with them. Best guess is the very high rewards on PoS mining for the early stages of the coin is meant to more than pay the early buyers and investors to cover inflation from dumping a lot of coins on the market via jango and solitaire. |
|
|
|
"Payola, in the music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on commercial radio in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. Under U.S. law, 47 U.S.C. § 317, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime, and that play of the song should not be counted as a "regular airplay"."
Have you tried tipping on Jango? The second half of your quote explains why it isn't payola. The songs are not presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. |
|
|
|
The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate?
I think to have coins to distribute to the new-to-crypto people. Yes, that means very high inflation. It is one way of getting participation from that group. Hopefully, for those of us holding neucoins, there will be more deals in the future. I don't look at what exists now as all there will every be. Jango in essence is a complete economy. neu gives users coins. users can tip performers if they like their music. performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins. users and performers can get coins out of jango to invest/stake or trade on bittrex for btc. I don't think what you say is invalid, but I don't expect them to accomplish everything at once. Very solid post all around. You make some great points. |
|
|
|
I don't believe the amount of user engagement entailed in Jango NeuCoin tipping or Solitaire playing is worthy of being counted as the creation of a new "user".
Adapting from user acquisition speak, I'd consider them something closer to a "lead." Whether neucoin ultimately "converts" them remains to be seen. Maybe they are or maybe they aren't or maybe they will we don't know. Every coin has a consumer education problem. Neucoin will end up with a rather large freshman class. Most companies use the same strategy when reporting numbers. I've worked for several. Even behemoths like Facebook and Twitter report a significant segment of "zombie" users as actual users. |
|
|
|
In fairness, I actually like their marketing strategy though. I'm a frequent Jango user (where I first heard about it, despite spending lots of time on crypto for the last few years) and just tried their Solitaire Racer Facebook game. It's things like that where the average person who knows nothing about crypto but has maybe heard of Bitcoin will start to connect the dots in their head and realize that Bitcoin might be useful for something.
They're making it extremely easy to use. "Do you like this song? Press this button to tip them with crypto." It doesn't get any simpler. "Do you like this game? Play more and earn this NeuCoin thingy" Suddenly people who had no interest in Bitcoin will see it as their way of cashing out their new found crypto token. As Bitcoin gains legitimacy it gets even easier to make the connection between loyalty token (NeuCoin) and real world goods and that's how value gets created.
As a basic idea, I agree. If we, just as a theory, use a time-machine in the past and think about a project like Neucoin, it really could be interesting: Easy to use for everybody, easy to "adopt", something like a "fun-way" to learn about and to get in touch with Crypto, micro-tipping, communication and education to involve unexperienced user, transparency, and so on. It's nothing I would call very special or innovative but I wouldn't ever criticize a project with such a focus if it's done right. What would be needed for that? A stable base. The code and the economical-design must be stable, it needs a skilled and hardworking team and a lot of communication. And it would need decentralization! A project like that would only have the chance to reach real value as a community-project, with very low barriers to participate for everybody and also other Developers. It would not and should not be about greed, not all about the price. The price should reflect adoption, but shouldn't be the focus. It would be more an "education-fun-project". In fact there already is/was this kind of project: Doge. And just by the way: Neucoin wanted to repeat the success of Doge regarding adoption but with the intention to make big money out of it. The intention behind the squirrel is to establish a branding, something that is appealing in a simple way... it's the attempt to use simple advertising-mechanism. Nothing wrong with that, but if there is not more than some advertising-methods, there is still nothing. And the problem is: Neucoin is bad for Crypto. Because for those who are really new to Crypto, Neucoin is a bad experience. Not just because of the money. It's simply not what they claimed it would be. It's not open and decentralized and fun and communication and education. It's a dictatorship, the team shows nothing but ignorance and arrogance and incompetence. And why? Because they acted out of greed! That was the focus since day one. It's visible everywhere. Especially the economical-design is obvious. I mean, it's not just obvious, it's ridiculous. It is as if greed has lowered the IQ of those who are responsible for that. And it's a simple fact that greed makes people stupid. They develop stupid ideas blinded by greed. And some buy stupid projects blinded by stupid promises which are totally in contrast to the facts. It's not meant as critique to those who invested because some were just unexperienced but it's kind of stupid to feel married to a project that's not just totally flawed by design but also without any respect for those who gave there money. And greed is also the reason for the lack of communication because it's too easy to reveal. It's easy to ask questions in a way that both, the answer or the silence, would be revealing. So they have to avoid communication and they have control communication. And both is obvious: They avoid communication in this thread because they can't control it. They control communication (and also avoid it) on their own forum. And isn't it paradox that they are not even able to make a better forum? I mean, a lot of little shitcoins have at least good communication-platforms. But they don't care about that because they don't like communication! It's kind of a psychological problem, because if I have something to hide I fear questions and if I fear questions I fear communications. That's why the communication is always "one-way". They say what they have to say but they don't discuss things. It's not that it would be too much work. They just can't do that because open discussions are a risk. But, they are not even really aware about all those dynamics. They believed to be super-smart while they were blinded by greed. That's the big red line and it's still visible. I mean, all the talking about Jango... Jango was only possible because of relationships. The same guy behind Neucoin is behind Jango. So what. It's just another advertising-attempt and not a sign of progress. And there is no natural way to grow because the design is totally flawed. Now they destroy coins which seems to make sense for the exchanges but a professional who thinks about adding Neucoin to his platform (if there would be anybody) will rethink that. The same with the switch to full PoS. It raises some questions but at the same time it also gives answers. It's all about the price and they still want to sell a product they make out of nothing because they hold nearly all of it, but without quality or a real philosophy behind. My advice to those who invested in this is simple: Don't feel married to a project if the team behind doesn't show at least a little respect for your concerns. If I read in the official forum it's obvious for me that people have questions but also fear to ask those questions and to be critical. And it's understandable... they don't want to damage anything. But ask yourself if that atmosphere is in line with all the claims what Neucoin should stand for. The innovation is exactly the stuff you don't like, which means you overlook it as innovation. Nothing wrong with that, its a personal choice. You have to realize you are being highly altruistic in your requirements. Again, nothing wrong with, that but it lacks a little bit of pragmatism. What you are asking is very unlikely to occur without some monetary motivation (aka greed) Ultimately the "decentralization" concern comes down to the PoS vs PoW argument. NEU will be centralized for a time. Neucoin is decentralizing its currency by paying them out to consumers as rewards. It is going to take a while but in reality is not any more BS than an average PoW model. (eth has an amazing PoW model, but I digress) There is a hidden PoW model in the neucoin approach. Instead of buying an expensive graphics card or ASIC and burning electricity to solve arbitrary problems, people frequent websites or create content. Its human-based PoW. They then have the option to grow their coins by staking or using a growth account that functions just like a common CD. Which of the two approaches do you think is the most inclusive of average consumers? They've taken steps to address some of the major concerns raised here. Decentralization will be accelerated and the number of coins will be greatly reduced. This coin is so young. Will you not have a different opinion many years from now when the coins have been distributed and are no longer centralized? It may not start trading well until that point, but I'd rather be staking a few coins in the meantime. |
|
|
|
And sorry, but I absolutely don't believe that this is more than a blatant lie.
Think about this: The Poloniex-Exchange has about 120,000 Users (they don't show it anymore but it was about 100k by end of the last year). And the Neucoin-Team wants everybody to believe they have 275,000 and that they grow with 8000 Users a day? That would be another 240,000 per month!
Everybody who thinks about that must come to the conclusion that this is a ridiculous lie. Poloniex has a 60,000 BTC-volume today in 24 hours, with their 120k Users and multiple projects on the exchange, mainly it's about Ethereum. Neucoin usually has a volume of not more than 1 BTC per day (today it's more because of the announcement, but not sure how much is real and how much is fake).
You are applying "house rules" to a coin that isn't playing by them. I find this thread myopic. 120K registered users or unique users checking in per month? There is a big difference. Poloniex doesn't compare to something with volume like Jango.com. NEU growth is linked to Jango.com usage and growth. Do you have access to comscore? Compare Jango and Poloniex. You don't get fully accurate numbers but it is good for comparing the size of two sites. (Jango.com gets 10-20x as many unique visitors without counting mobile apps.) |
|
|
|
I disagree with the decision that punishing as a means to an end is the right way to do do it. Instead, it should be incentivized.
yes, I can get on board with that thinking. |
|
|
|
I’m ready to declare it the next big thing but I am also unable to declare it dead.
Wow, breaking news, newbie thinks neucoin might not be dead (i'm presuming quote should read "I'm not ready to...? typo?) That's right... typo. Your mom doesn't think neucoin is dead. |
|
|
|
Response to: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=944933.msg13966447#msg13966447Hey Tempus, thanks for sleuthing Did the purchase of neucoin tokens not occur? I don’t know what that means. Is a token the same as a coin? On your second point, I don’t think there has been an annual review yet, so that remains to be seen. The distribution is so tight to angel investors, it may have happened. I can’t really answer that. If there is an issue here, it can also be attributed to being behind schedule. Third point and beyond: That is shitty. The launch was not ideal. This is one of their biggest blunders. These are all symptoms of a rocky start. As far as heavy-handed moderation of their forums goes, I wasn’t around to see what was going on. I’m the type that prefers openness and little to no moderating. They lose points for that. I have been reading the neucoin.org forums recently and they do have unusual moderating techniques where they close or remove threads after they’ve reached a resolution. I think of forums as an archive and that process strange. I understand that the distribution of coins is HEAVILY centralized. I also understand why that’s a problem for this community. not an insult: its obvious to a relative layperson like me that crypto people are more cynical and skeptical than average. That can be very healthy to the yin/yang of society and for keeping entities like NeuCoin honest. The distribution of coins should be no surprise to anyone. It was set up this way from the start. If the distribution rate is lower than expected, it’s my belief that this is related to a rocky start and not from them pulling a fast one on the community. To that point, I think the rocky start has a lot to do with them over or under estimating, not sure which, this audience and threads or feedback like what we see here. Taking a step back from the fact that this is a crypto currency we are discussing and instead looking at it as a business model, I don’t know, I think its a little interesting. I’m not sure it will ever have a place in this community, but horses for courses and all that. I’m ready to declare it the next big thing but I am also unable to declare it dead. btw… any read on the current movement of coins post PoS switch? There has been some activity. |
|
|
|
Its only for new growth accounts going forward. Since the network shrunk with the PoW miners going away, they need more nodes to keep security up. Do you disagree? |
|
|
|
Do you think they...
1. ...acted honest?
2. ...did not lie?
3. ...delivered their promises?
4. ...are as transparent as promised?
5. ...are open for discussion?
I can't answer 1,2 and 4. Partly because I'd have to do some analysis and partly because I'm not sure I (we?) have enough info to determine the answers. Can you provide an example of something specific to get me thinking? I may not be interpreting your question correctly, but no, not 100%. For one, PoW ended much sooner. Some deliverables have been shaky but there is no way that I can jump to the conclusion that they intentionally misled anyone. Problems with rollout can easily be blamed on shit going wrong and people leaving. Executing big projects is hard even if you have a perfect strategy. Are they open to discussion? Yes, I think they are to an extent or at least were at one time. If you are being fair, you have to admit that not all of the contents of this thread qualify as "discussion." I think people have their limits but at the same time I'm not delusional enough to think they executed communication perfectly. |
|
|
|
I think its unfair to throw around the word scam here unless you really have some evidence or just don't know what that word means. Its not productive and you should learn to articulate your thoughts better. By all accounts, the creators and investors are underwater. What kind of scam is that? Its an insult to proper scams. Poor execution and zealous marketing speak is not a scam. Doing things in a way you don't agree with is not a scam. I mean, unless you are a tinfoil-hat-wearing-moon-is-a-hologram-so-how-could-we-land-there? type.  |
|
|
|
Just got an email today stating that POW is done and the coin is moving to a full POS system. Was that previously announced or is that a fork in the coin ? Probably already answered but I'm not able to read hundreds of pages of text lol
They switched sooner than expected due to sell pressure. It was supposed to be about a year out from launch. Please dont rush in to ANY crypto. They are all shit. Some much more than others. neucoin more than most.
That's how its feeling. I mean, my take is a little different. They are all interesting, but rather stupid places to put your money as an investment. Like betting on horses, but if there were a few million horses in the race. Having some fun is ok. The early minting rates and growth accounts are attractive on NEU. Its not worth a damn if the coin becomes worthless. 200% of 0 is 0. Inflation is a risk. return rates of more established coins are not better than an average high-yield bank account and even worse when the Fed isn't buying a load of government bonds. the crypto coin market is left to total speculation at this time. if there were a risk free 100% annual return out there then that's where all of my money would be. I've seen your line of thought before,
"So neucoin is naff, but the masses wont know or care"
Sorry, don't see the logic there.
Not precisely my line but close. its plausible to me that they won't know or care. I see a big "what if?" NEU reminds me of startups I've seen or worked on. Its true that 90% of them fail, but some of them don't. Sometimes having the backing of others that have gone through a startup successfully before makes the difference and sometimes it doesn't. I do like the ones that start simple and grind it out but there are other approaches that work as well. My observation is that they are doing something different by applying a startup approach. maybe its good or maybe its not Do not buy into projects where private groups get in early and pump up coins using a small supply. There is no need to pay so much for this idea. At launch people payed a valuation of 72 million. Now wonder everyone except the initial private investors made money on this. Now the valuation is still a ridiculous 13 million. Reply here for more info: https://twitter.com/jessecouch/status/700411947884236800The marketcap is at $ 648,214: http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/neucoin/(those coins that are really on the market) Thank you for your replies, tempus. I understand your take on the numbers a little better. I'll take some time to do the math myself and apply it to other coins for a comparison. We'll see how they react to the poor launch and what comes of the integrations they have out there. 100% PoS switch won't get them any more street cred, but it has apparently created a temporary improvement in price. |
|
|
|
|
Did not mean to post a suspicious link! Check their twitter/blog for a post from today about them shifting 100% to PoS because PoWers are just dumping coins.
|
|
|
|
|
This thread is crazy. I was up until 1:30 last night reading close to half from middle to end. Let’s call it a guilty pleasure. I had a strong popcorn craving the entire time.
I’m fascinated by the blockchain from a technical perspective and I own a little BTC. I’m interested in using existing coins and blockchain technology in products I develop.
I’m even newer to Bitcoin alternatives and media surrounding NEU and their mission is most of what got me thinking about alts, but I’m considering many. I did get some neucoin which I’ve been staking myself. The value and trading volumes have been very poor. /r/neucoin led me here (first time reader last night.) This thread, Reddit and many others have been insanely harsh on the coin and I’m trying to wrap my head around it. Is this kind of response at all normal for new Altcoins? Defensive BTC/other-alt holders? Poor track record of previous alts? The comments or accusations here are so strong. I have to believe its more than just the technicals that have been pointed out.
The crypto community mostly rejected this coin from the start and those that didn’t have all but abandoned it the last several months.
This came over the twitter today: http://[Suspicious link removed]/1PHNTRB
It reads like an acknowledgement from them that the community is not interested in Neucoin. It isn’t very welcome news, but I am conflicted. I still have the same question I’ve had since I first concluded that there might be very little community support for this currency. Does it matter? If the mission of this coin is mass adoption by people unfamiliar with and even weary of crypto currency, why do they need much establishment support to complete their mission?
Early marketing did not kick things off very well. I don’t think that instantly losing 50% of founders’ value was part of the plan. At the same time, I don’t expect them to take a conventional approach and that’s exactly what makes neu interesting to me. There is no safe bet in crypto. No coins have any mass appeal, so why do what other coins do? As a tech entrepreneur, I identify with NEU’s approach to gaining marketshare, so I’m not as ready to write them off as many of you.
The foundations still have money in the bank and they still have unparalleled efforts in progress to get coins into the hands of regular Joes. Have reports of NEU’s death been greatly exaggerated?
This may be the wrong crowd to ask. I think threads like this played a role in the rocky start and do expect some responses to not be very cordial. This does seem like a place where people are still discussing neu that isn’t moderated.
|
|
|
|
|
