True. But it's also frightening to investors, especially newer ones. If somebody has the power to destroy value, and they use it, sane people have to wonder when they're going to do it again. Most traders aren't sane, which helps,. but traders are not the only investors.

It's an orphan. Just hit repairwallet and it'll clear out and not lose any staking weight.

to the idiot dumping across three exchanges:

You do realize you're cutting your own throat on this, right? We'll recover because we have a good product. There is no point to this action that I can see.

I'd suggest opening it to sync a few days before maturity because TEK takes a LONG time to sync. Aside from that, my strategy is a a few large blocks and keep it closed unless I'm sending or staking.

And to the gentleman who's looking at investing: In my (admittedly limited) experience, TEK has been the most consistently profitable POS coin out there, though some people say HBN beats it in the longer term. The PoS rate is variable, but if you watch the staking difficulty and open your wallet accordingly, you will get close to 40% in 30 days. If you just toss the dice, it'll be somewhere around 25 to 30 percent in the same general time frame.

Also, the market is extreme. Around the first of the month (as CrazyIvan noted angrily) there are some people who will just sell at any price. I think they are probably paying bills, and I view it as a purchase opportunity. The highs on the market seem to be around the 17th to 20th. This pattern has been inexact but fairly consistent for over a year. TEK is really not for the impatient or non stubborn. (I'm terribly impatient, but also terribly stubborn, so I do well). To assuage my impatience, I also stake HyperStake, which is a very different animal. It too has done me very well, but it's a much faster game.

I don't know if it's coincidence or not, but I got less orphans with the newest wallet than I did before. But if you do get them, just run repairwallet and it'll clear them out and you'll be able to stake the mature coins again.

An interesting question. And to add a bit of clarification, for it to equal bitcoin PER UNIT, the price would have to equal out to 1/4th of current BTC value, as there are four times as many GameCredits to be produced.

if this isn't already resolved, contact Polo directly and open a ticket. I just looked it up in the block explorer, and it has confirmed.

85 confirmations as of this moment.

Jeezus, I steip out for a couple days and a fight breaks out. I miss all the fun

Truth is, we're not all in one place, that's just CuriousCat's people. If all goes well, even half as well as our low aim, all the core team will indeed be in one picture...


On the beach, sippin' drinks and toasting the gamers

On number two, have you defined a custom change address? Not sure, but that could explain it.

It gets better https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/GMC_BTC

That explains it It looked like you were talking to rocoro, and it simply didn't compute. Carry on, I'm with it now

I can guess.

BTC took a huge hit, and the fourtunes of TEK always seem to ride that wave. That's what it is, a guess, but I think it fairly accurate.

Huh? who triggered that?

Do you have the latest wallet? You don't need it, but it does do a bit better at discovering peers. No longer needs addnodes

POS coins never do well on bittrex. I think the majority of traders there take too much caffeine. And if I'm saying that, with a 2 pot of coffee a day habit, think how much they must drink

But joking aside, it does seem to be true. We're on Cryptsy and Poloniex, and they don't delist based on a dartboard and a bottle of tequila.

EDIT: that was a bit harsh on bittrex. They host on Azure, as I understand it, and that gets expensive. So they can't hold on to low volume as well as some can. I would highly recommend to them to purchase some real servers. Then they just pay electric/cohosting and internet connection charges. Much cheaper and better control.

Yes.

It seems to me that the debate needs a bit of a jolt, because frankly, it's largely a bunch of horseshit. Both in the XT camp and the Core camp. Block sizes need to increase, but it don't need to happen RIGHT NOW. That being said, the core devs have been dragging their feet, and the Bitcoin Foundation would be a joke if it were funny. They all poo-pooh the altcoins, but the simple fact is that alts address most, if not all, of the technical deficiencies of Bitcoin. If the core team does NOT stop resting on first mover advantage and actually step up their game, BTC will be remembered as the one that started it all. Historically.

That being said, forcing the issue in this manner is purely political. Mike Hearn and Gavin Andresen should have known better. I'm pretty sure Mike did know better. To further exacerbate a bad situation, posts are being deleted left and right on reddit, to the point that even I notice. I don't go on reddit much because I think it's general interface was designed to drive business elsewhere. Anywhere else, frankly. But with both sides willing to use censorship and lies regarding the other, I smell fish. Thus a polemic thread seems a good place to catch the fallout. It is an unfortunate truth that headlines are never accurate, but they shape opinion and draw attention.

Nah, I don't know any of the people he named. I meant it more generically. I should have clarified that. The personal attacks are pointless. I agree that it should be discussed, and not in the manner it has been. This thread seemed like it would attract attention.

Hello Y'all.

Just an update on the forum

One, we'd like to see more of you lovely people over there, and I've resolved most of the craziness in my life to the point that I'll be able to be active there myself.

Two, I had to alter the policy for new people as we've had multiple spam attacks over the last couple of days. Between Shavers and I, we've removed four bogus users and over 100 bullshit posts with links to everything from steam accounts to fetanyl. Very annoying, and counterproductive. So I've change the newly registered user category to only allow posts in the General forum. The good part of this is that I can kill spam in one place. The bad side is that I'm not 100% sure I upgraded every real account's permissions, so if you're there and can't post in the normal threads, let me or any other staff member know. Post it in "chit-chat" for the fastest results, or PM me. I'll fix it quickly.

For new users, I know most of you here by screen name, and if you use a different one, just PM me with your BCT screen name and I'll upgrade you immediately. Or just post something in chit-chat. Real users are easy to distinguish from spambots, so you'll get upgraded near to immediately.

I didn't want to impose such controls, but I simply do not have time to deal with a bot or useless idiot posting useless garbage in a hit and run. I apologize for the inconvenience, and if you know anybody playing these games, feel free to hit 'em upside the head with a baseball bat.

I chose to participate in this thread because I agree with the OP's thought that some people, and some of them rather powerful in the crypto sphere, are deliberately stifling debate. As to whether XT is a good idea, I'm solidly on the fence. Increasing the block size is definitely a good idea. Or at least one possible way to increase tx throughput. Another would be shorter block times with an appropriately smaller block reward to maintain the pace of production while increasing the speed of transactions.

It's not so much that one side is better than the other. The Bitcoin Foundation and core developers have shown a great deal of animosity towards new ideas, and have frankly been far too cooperative with the very people that stand to lose the most if bitcoin does become mainstream. OTOH, forcing the issue like this is pretty much like playing russian roulette with an autoloader.

There are things I like about the XT proposal. It's release, as it was done, is just plain irresponsible. Those that claim otherwise in a reasonable manner, and respond in such a manner when called to account, I've got no problem with. Those who respond with overt censorship, ad-hominem attacks, histrionics, etc clearly do not believe in the merits of their argument. But they believe in something unseen, or else they'd let the thing stand or fall on it's merits.

Git source, by any chance? I honestly don't know what has been or can be done

EDIT: I missed Rocoro's comment in all this. How would you stake a cold wallet? It's by definition offline and not connected to the network.