Ah yes. Interesting situation.

OK. Thanks for the reply. I won't ask the question again.

I cannot buy anything with Viacoin.  It is a cryptocurrency, but I don't see what distinguishes it, in terms of unit value, from hundreds of other coins. The system is needed for XCH, but not the individual units of VIA (please correct me if I am wrong)

Bitcoin had a large distribution and had become established as a medium of exchange before it was used for embedded carriers like XCP.

Sorry, I am still not seeing it....BTC has value because it is a spendable currency. I probably am not properly understanding the way the embedded consensus works...Please can you explain how Clearinghouse adds to the unit value of Viacoin ?

This is a community. If you want to take control,there are many who will gladly follow.

There have been many successful coins where the original devs faded out, and community members took a chance to run the show.

What gives Viacoin value ? XCH has value, but is Viacoin not simply the conduit for Clearinghouse and as such, does it need a market value (per unit rather than as a whole system) ?

I believe that the majority of altcoin users miss the point that high inflation is an extremely important thing to have, in order to drive currency velocity and adoption. A deflationary currency encourages hoarding (fixed supply) and not spending, thus the holders hold on to it, driving a cycle of decline in velocity and thus stagnation.

Unlike Fiat, Cryptocurrencies have little or no real-world need to be spent, and thus holders of non-inflationary currencies can artificially and temporarily raise price by speculation, but the price always peaks and then drifts to new lows. This is because the currency is concentrating in fewer hands all the time, who are holding (not spending) it, and thus a cycle of falling velocity and less distribution (with unequal distribution) continues.

This is actually happening in Fiat currencies (Japan is well down the road), but it is much slower owing to the huge need for spending Fiat. The holders of cash are getting larger and larger balances relative to everyone else, and currencies are in a slow death spiral (which is now beyond the event horizon, with interest rates at the zero bound). The 'apparent' rise in value of fiat currencies (so called deflation) is only a temporary symptom of the monetary (true) inflation that has occurred, and has been caused by the hoarders of fiat (the 1% or whatever) pursuing monetary policies designed to limit price rises (rises = so-called inflation).

Whilst inflation may discourage holders and investors in the early days and drive down the price short term, it is extremely important to redistribute the wealth from the holders to the spenders allowing an economy to work properly. The only reason this is working out currently with Bitcoin is that it will take years until it becomes deflationary and so far its mining inflation has worked out to great effect.

Concluding, I restate my thesis that a Cryptocurrency, in its early life , has nothing other than inflation to drive its wider adoption. Bitcoin did/does it with PoW mining (and that is Satoshis original intention). A PoS coin needs high inflation to drive adoption, and that can only be achieved through the PoS rate. As competition is very fierce, the ones with the highest PoS will have the best chance.
I would go so far as to suggest that even 1000% is not too much, provided that it only lasts for a limited period (maybe years), and is tapered after that.

Agree that price is not the relevant issue , but I don't really see the relevance of the number of coins on the network control either. You quote 18,000,000 and it's actually 1000x that, which rather disproves that point. x100, x1000, x1m, whatever.

My main point is that we need numbers of users and holders asap, because there is no reason for them to turn up later (over and above any other coin), and ECC has to survive until mainstream, above all.  The attraction for new users is the 'free' stake. You can read the theory in this thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=783697.100;topicseen   if you want to know why: go from the beginning.

Crossposting will be useful for new entrants. Most posts would be best to appear in both forums until there is a large membership on the CC forum.

LOL .. Experienced traders know what that means.

There are so many altcoins, that the vast majority of them are destined to become extinct. Only those with large communities and strong networks have any chance of surviving the 'nuclear winter'. There are hundreds of coins in competition for a limited number of core community members (only committed altcoin diehards will stick with this through a long attrition).

Stake is viewed as a kind of ROI by most people (whether in error or not), and a high % foments more activity. Sellers need to make coin available , in quantity, and cheaply, to draw in fresh adopters. The price on the markets thoughout this phase is immaterial: the outcome as I see it is binary, live or die... wider adoption and open wallets are the only thing that will save PoS coins, and a very high PoS will provide those things.

Look at it this way: How do we distinguish ECC from the rest and encourage defection from other coins ?
I can already see the high PoS coins gaining ground against the others (excepting the very large ones like PPC etc).  There is no downside to increasing PoS, because it can always be reduced in a taper later,(say 2 years) when survival may be assured.

This is not a whim, but rather the result of daily research and close interaction on my part, with 80+ different coins for more than 18 months.

It is my opinion, but I welcome opposing views : I would rather be persuaded that a low PoS was better. Maybe 25% is enough, but what are the objections to a significant rise ?

Great work is being done, but please can we increase the rate of PoS in order to save this coin ? 

 We need a discussion here about the PoS... I do not want to see the death of the network if there is not a better incentive to open wallets, and also a chance for fresh buyers to acquire significant parcels of coins.

Many people hold a number of different PoS coins, and will only want to stake the best yielding ones. That will apply for more and more holders in future.

The wallet GUI is a great job.

The thing that lets this coin down for me is the low PoS. The network has little incentive to be maintained : watch it slow down. I know that the PoS was lowered, but I am having one more try to put my side of the argument for raising it. I have a lot of experience here, and have seen nothing which endears me to small % staking, despite extensive research. The PoS can be tapered down over the course of a couple of years, which addresses concerns about inflation, but the network benefits of high PoS are desperately needed in the fragile early stages.


I recommend increasing the stake to AT LEAST 150% pa. This will give ECC a chance to revive properly. There is an association of high PoS coins, which is great for network support.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=783697.80


I believe many posters will eventually understand how this works for PoS coins, but might not get there until it is too late.

Similar to other coins, but yes.

The technology is working very well....

However, it has been ignored by all but the more specialised operators...there is no reason for new buyers to come in..yet.

My wallet is running fine. Always make sure you use the newest .conf file nodes.

Excellent...  The incremental build up of this currency is good.

Paypal will only gain. Look at the situation in Merchant Services. There is a huge integration of Visa/Mastercard used through Paypal, in preference to direct with the card issuers. The reason is the accessability of Paypal.

Nobody knows. So much can happen in one year.

The cold storage addresses reflect that portion of the coins (including traders balances) that the exchange deems prudent to store that way. It may be all traders balances, or any % or them.

To support that assertion, I think you would find that withdrawals and deposits may vary in speed of response according to the internal accounting/storage used.

Dismiss out of hand with no research, and no thought. Good strategy.