No.  I think that has dropped off the priorities for now.

Well only a fool would buy a coin with no developers and hence no future.  We don't know for sure what happened because the developers don't have the balls to come on here and tell us anything.  Right now the only thing that can be done is some kind of community takeover - hence my previous post.

Since the devs don't even have the decency to show their faces here it might be useful for us to discuss amongst ourselves some solutions to the current issues. 

Someone suggested a community takeover previously - I'm not sure how that would work given the inability to access the developers.  Perhaps the source code could be used to create a new fork?  Unfortunately I don't have the coding knowledge or expertise to know how viable this would be. 

Obviously a community takeover would mean a separation from any revenue derived from the Social Media accounts that the devs control.  I suppose this illustrates the problems of centralised control pretty well.  With delisting imminent and the ever shrinking buy back revenue that was being provided it was ultimately useless (no volume=no exchange=no buyback) - which had been one of the reasons people such as myself kept pushing the agenda of doing something to increase volume.

A takeover would need to address the question of utility, volume and ultimately if there would be any actual point in doing this.  The social media advertising idea still has some merit and could still work but could it be reintegrated or incorporated in some way with a post community takeover coin?  For one thing I think it would be best to rebrand to a new name like SMART - Social Media Advertising and Related Technologies - it would help differentiate the new coin.  (I'll refer to the takeover coin as SMART to avoid confusion.)

As for other changes one idea I have is of integrating advertising into the wallet clients, including a new mobile wallet (once developed).  Though this would be accessing a niche audience as a target (i.e. those who are interested in or hold cryptocurrencies) for certain types of advertising (e.g. tech related) it might actually be quite valuable to the right companies. 

The mobile wallet would require new development and would be a combined wallet for Bitcoin (and perhaps Litecoin) as well as SMART, with the aim of getting non-SMART users using it for their mobile BTC transactions.  This would both grow the audience for advertising too as well as creating free advertising for SMART.  Obviously in order to do this the wallet would need to be as good if not better than the current mobile solutions for Bitcoin - not an easy task (perhaps not even possible). Eventually the wallet could grow to incorporate the top 10 (or however many you want) cryptocurrencies.

Furthermore I would suggest using advertising revenues to fund development of SMART and the multi-mobile wallet rather than buying back coins or burning them.  Instead volume could be created by allowing advertisers to buy ads at a discount using SMART.  I would also suggest looking into integration with SHAPESHIFT.io as a matter of urgency once volume is re-established.

Anyway these are just suggestions and may be limited by my lack of knowledge so I would love to hear what others think and what other or alternative suggestions they may have.

No surprise (of course) but the delisting threat has returned and no surprise the devs continue to be AWOL.

The only way to fight that is to eliminate SHA & SCRYPT and be prepared to keep changing the others (algorithms) every time a new one becomes ASIC mineable.  This is not too hard to do, it just means committing to (potentially) regular hard forks although in practice since the development time for ASICs is quite long and costly it would not be that often.  

Furthermore I personally think if this is done it would also make sense to revert to a single GPU/CPU algorithm.  The multi-algorithm approach doesn't really bring enough advantages (IMO) for the added complexity and confusion it causes.  I personally think that the switch to multi-algo has actually been detrimental to DGB - although it seemed like a good idea at the time.  The only other coin that used multiple algos, MYRIAD, is basically dead and I don't think that is a coincidence.  People like to know how much mining is costing them and this approach makes these calculations much more opaque and difficult to do.

Perhaps if DGB had some form of anonymous transactions it might help to raise it's profile, particularly if it used a different method to the current anonymous coins like DASH (still the worst name ever) or Monero.

I think you're right but the spineless way they have behaved is just as bad as perpetrating a scam. 

There were many of us here who were willing to work with the devs to come up with ideas and find ways to take this forward - you were one of the most active people on here.  Unfortunately they were initially too arrogant to admit there was a problem and then after a while they just chose to go off and ignore us as if the problem would just go away. 

We invested in this in good faith - I can accept a coin failing if the devs have tried all they can to succeed.  It is much harder to accept failure on the basis of the developers neglect, aloofness and general unwillingness to communicate.  They have essentially run their own ship aground when this could easily have been turned around with community help. 

Clearly they view those of us who supported this with utter contempt.  The fact that they don't even have the balls to come on here and admit their failure makes my blood boil and is proof of this.  They haven't mad a single attempt to reassure people or stem the tide of fear and uncertainty here.

If they had any kind of decency they would use the ICO funds to put up a buy wall at the ICO price so that all the people that they betrayed can at least get some of their BTC back.

Their reputations are trash now and I sincerely hope people take this as a lesson to never invest in anything that these people do again.  Is there a BCT thread with a list of untrustworthy developers? If not there should be and they should be on there.

No it was actually 0.93 BTC.

Don't bother waiting for the devs to answer - they don't give a fuck.  If it happens should be the last day of the month i.e. 31st July but don't bet on it - the last one was delayed for no obvious reason.  Given the downward creep I wouldn't expect more than 0.2BTC even if it does happen so it's pretty much irrelevant anyway.

Looks like we've all learnt a lesson here.  It's almost comical that the dev came on to ask why everyone was freaking out - whilst answering none of the previous questions or concerns.  Well let's hope others have learnt from this too and will not invest in anything that these jokers do again.

In addition to answering my questions listed above here are some suggestions for getting this back on track:

1) Regular communication and updates.
2) More transparency on the revenues for buybacks, with proof of purchasing and evidence of burned coins - for example with the burn wallet being held by a trusted third party such as Bittrex who can give independent confirmation.
3) 100% of the revenues to be used for buybacks until (at the very least) SMAC has sustained volume of over 0.2 BTC per day and is above the ICO price.
4) Some realistic dates for the market being ready.
5) More details on exactly how the Social Media Advertising component is being run to allow some community brainstorming on ways to make it more effective.
6) Some realistic plans on increasing long term volume for SMAC including use cases/utility - this can involve community discussion/suggestions if the dev team are out of ideas.

I'm pissed off at the lack of communication or direct answers to the majority of mine and others' previous questions e.g. about the shrinking buybacks/lack of volume/poor promotion etc.  The fact that you are now acting like this is surprising is in itself rather worrying particularly as these questions and concerns have been voiced multiple times without being properly addressed.

I see now that you are referring to the marketplace and forum as the same thing so it is not surprising that people are confused.  Even when the market is finished (assuming it gets finished) what will be done to increase volume?

The simple fact remains for a coin based on marketing there has been a remarkable absence, inability or perhaps unwillingness to market SMAC itself.  Few know it exists and many of those that do have lost faith in the team to the point of selling at significant loss.

BTW I have not sold any coins either but the recent dumping proves my point about investor confidence.  Most people will silently dump rather than posting on here particularly if they see that the devs don't seem to care.  Given previous experience of what that means in the alt scene most people will assume the worst and attempt to recover whatever BTC they can rather than lose it all.

Are you right in the fucking head mate or do you just have a really short memory?  Maybe this will help:

- Current news on the marketplace which we were told was central to SMAC's success and was due to be ready weeks ago but has not been mentioned at all.
 
- Why the buybacks are shrinking each time instead of getting bigger (this month was supposed to be a higher percentage of revenue but is less than a quarter of last month's amount which was itself less than the previous month)?

- What is being done to promote the coin (considering they are supposed to be marketing experts)?

- What will be done to increase volume and prevent the constant threat of delisting?

- Why don't the team give regular updates anymore or answer questions as they did previously - (giving the distinct impression that they don't care)?

- What has become of the roadmap - (remember that? -  I have copied the pic below as a reminder)?

- Why the fuck any of us should continue to support this or believe that the team have any fucking clue what they are doing?




That's just for a start - help me out here - am I the only one who thinks answers to these things are reasonable? People like myself, Penn and Wurstglee have been avid supporters of this from the beginning but if the developer(s) don't even respect us enough to answer our basic questions then what are we expected to do?

 
No news?  No clarity? No further information?  Well done.

Really? This is your response after days of inactivity and turmoil? 

It doesn't help that the devs have buggered off up their own arses.  Their behaviour is unforgivable so unless they have a very good reason for it their reputations are dirt now (not that it means that much in crypto).  This seems like a case of deliberately ruining a coin and screwing those that supported and invested in it for no reason.

Exactly and the crypto world is topsy turvy and weird.  Even Vertcoin (which has had a thousand deaths) recently got pumped.  Nothing is truly dead in crypto.  All it takes is for someone to inject a bit of fresh BTC into a project to start a revival and that can potentially trigger something much bigger.

Simply panicking and selling for a tenth of the money you paid is just plain stupid - you take away any chance of ever getting that money back just to save a tiny amount of money from being lost.

To use an analogy:  Just because you're not happy with how your pilot is flying the plane doesn't mean you should open the side door and jump out without a parachute (no matter how fearful you are of crashing)! 

Indeed.  They have no balls.  In actual fact they cut off their balls and sold them for a fraction of a bitcoin

I agree.  Getting pennies back on the pound by dumping is barely worth the effort of moving coins out of my wallet but even more than that I would gutted if the devs then proceeded to get it going again!  I think the knowledge that something I sold for pennies went on to be worth a fortune would hurt more than losing a few bitcoins on something that didn't pan out (small as that possibility might be).  That risk is just not worth the few pounds I might get back by dumping.

Anyway I always go into every coin these days expecting to be a bag holder - that's pretty much the only real certainty with any crypto.  There is no guarantee that any of them will ever succeed - even bitcoin is not really a success yet and could end up being worthless in the long term - the ultimate crypto bag hold.  That's the risk with new technology and concepts like this particularly when they are trying to upset those in control of the monetary system.

Not me.  It's not worth dumping for such tiny quantities.  I haven't sold a single coin.