It depends on what everyone wants the value of 1 Anal to be. The subscription fees must be valued accordingly in line with the fiat value. It would be best if the site just accepts Anal but if both then the fiat price will direct the Anal price. It must also be possible to tip to Anal wallets. A QR code can be shown.

You need the liquidity of an exchange. The community does not have to force any other exchanges or pay for listing but having just one exchange somewhere is good. A fiat purchasing method can also be done. It is also impossible to prevent any other exchange listings. If for example Anal turns out to be very successful, then exchanges will list it whether you like it or not. So I suggest leave Yobit as is. In fact I am beginning to like Yobit as an exchange.

Enjoy. While you are at it, convince Elon to get involved with Crypto...

In principle it is possible to send coins from any source to any destination if both sides have a valid address. If this is the case and coins do not show up it can be one of the following issues:

1) Delay with release at the source. This is possible but Bittrex is normally snappy with withdrawals and the likelihood of this being the issue is low.
2) User error during withdrawal (a) . Sometimes there could be a 2FA step that user has to do that he forgets about and when the 2FA condition is met the withdrawals goes through.
3) User error during withdrawal (b) . Incorrect destination address used. It is possible that a user can enter an incorrect address that does not correspond to the destination address. If the address is completely wrong like you entered a BTC address instead of a 10K address you could be lucky and the network will reject the tx and your coins will be returned. If it is a small error in the address of the same coin, then the coins will be lost and stuck in cyberspace until someone someday generates that address by luck. I really wish exchanges would add address books.
4) Delay with identification and/or allocation of a deposit at the destination. Chances are higher that this could be the issue.
5) Problem with the block chain. The chain seems smooth without issues so the likelihood of an issue here is extremely low.

If you have a valid tx id in the withdrawal history on Bittrex it means that the coins were released. You can take that tx id and enter it into the block explorer to see what the status of the tx is. If you get this far and you used the correct destination address, then the issue is probably at point 4 above. Wait a while and refresh at the destination from time to time. If nothing happens then contact the destination and raise a ticket to look for the deposit and allocate it to your account.

Things can happen on computers at any time for 1000 different reasons. Some of the outcome could be corruption and most of the time it is local issues. It can be dev issues but mostly it is local. Good practice is to make backups of wallet.dat files and every time you create a new address in your wallet make a backup. I would recommend the following steps:

1) Close the wallet
2) Make a backup of your existing wallet.dat file that have the issues to a USB stick or to another place on your hard drive
3) Rename your \user\username\AppData\Roaming\10k folder to 10k.old
4) Re-download the 10k v2.0.2 wallet and let it download the block chain.
5) Rename the wallet.dat in the new 10k directory to wallet.old (this step is not really necessary)
6) Copy the wallet.dat file that you backed up in step 2 to the new 10k folder
7) Open the wallet and see if the error is gone
8.) If you get this far and the error is gone then great and you are back in business. If not then it means that your wallet.dat file might be corrupt. If this is the case then if you followed good practice you should have a backup of the wallet.dat file somewhere after you created your second address or the address that you sent the coins to. Take that backup and restore it to your new 10k folder and all should be ok.

Golden rule:
You never ever ever ever ever send coins to another address in your wallet without making a backup of the wallet.dat first after you created the new address and before sending the coins. Personally, I recommend sending to another wallet on a different computer but have used a 2nd address in wallet with no issues.

Prognosis:
If you get an error in step 4 then you have other issues on your computer that you need to trouble shoot. If you get an error in step 7 then your wallet.dat file is corrupt and requires a restore from a backup. Since corruption on a PC can happen at any time on any file from any application, it is good personal practice to make backups of critical files to cover yourself. If the outcome of this is that your wallet.dat file is corrupt and your coins lost, and you do not have a backup to restore from, then it is your own fault unfortunately.

Its manual at the moment. Send coins to trigger the next block. It should recognise the POS reward and kick of the next block but doesnt.

For the N-teenth time please understand the context and the facts before making such sweeping statements. The comment relates to E-cash (E-money).

1) The original dev disappeared and the block chain was stuck
2) Members of the community approached Spots to apply his magic skills to fix the chain which he did without any compensation.
3) A block number was decided upon when a swopout will occur to a new chain because the old one was FUBAR
4) The E-cash BCT thread was the main vehicle of communications and all decisions, processes etc. was discussed on BCT. It is a reasonable act as individual communications to different holders would be impractical and too time consuming.
5) It quickly became clear that the original block target will never be reached because the chain was limping. Everyone that was reading the BCT thread knew that they had to get their coins as quickly as possible to Bittrex for the swop and it was made very clear in advance that any coins not transferred to Bittrex would be forfeited to a central account in order to make the maths balance since the two chains were identical in numbers.
6) Since everyone's coins were lost in anyways on the old chain, those that cared enough to be diligent stayed up to date on developments on the BCT thread and they knew that the target block will never be reached. Those that did so, did not lose their coins and got a swopout. Those that were lax and did not exercise diligence lost their coins and had sour grapes afterwards calling Spots names.
7) Since Spots did everyone a favor to save the chain and investing a week of his time to save a coin without compensation and with no questions asked, it is acceptable that he could keep the forfeited coins. Due to the sour grapes of the holders that were not diligent, they complained excessively about the coins that Spots kept and as a result Spots decided again with advance notice that he would give the coins back to the community for free in an IRC giveaway. Again those that lost coins had the opportunity to get their coins back if they cared and exercised diligence. This was a reasonable act as administration and risk of fraud was too big to do a manual swopout for those that did not care to participate in the formal Bittrex swopout.
8.) Spots even offered to add E-cash to Gorrillastake, but when people kicked up a storm yet again he decided to walk away and drop E-cash from Gorillastake.

That was the end of that. Anyone that cares to look into the relevant threads and IRC logs will find that the above is the truth. Any allegations that says that Spots is a scammer due to the above events are therefore unfounded. As a result of his efforts, the only thing that Spots got out of his efforts to save E-cash was the loss of his trust ratings which he worked hard for to earn.  In hind sight, Spots should have walked away from E-cash and let everyone lose their money. He could have used the time better to enhance his other coins and he would still have had his high green trust ratings. This whole thing is rather a reflection back on the community for treating someone badly that came to the fore to assist the community. For this the community should be ashamed and if anything should give him his trust ratings back and remove their negative comments.

Regarding his current coins, Spots is doing excellent research and development on the impact and workings of high stake % and fast block chains. The outcome of his current work and experiments on coins like 10K will add to the body of knowledge of POS staking and economics and is an important piece of the puzzle for the future, especially retail use and adoption. In the process a lot of people have also made a lot of money which is a win-win situation.

The block chain is not moving along on autopilot to produce POS blocks every 40s or so as per the design. Only when coins are sent to another address does it trigger a POS block. If nothing is sent, the chain stands still. If Anal hodlers want to move their coins, it is currently a manual process whereby someone must send 20 coins or so to and fro from one address to another all the time so that the movement triggers POS blocks to be solved. Something is not right and the dev (or someone with coding knowledge) must fix this.

First of all the dev must fix the chain and wallet so that POS works properly.

What I mean is that something does not seem right with the POS. A chain should be going on autopilot at a pace of a block per 40s in this case. It does not make sense for a chain to be manual and that a block is only solved if someone sends coins somewhere. This would mean that if someone pays for something and there are no other transactions for the next 2 hours the transaction will not be confirmed for some while. The dev needs to look into this and fix what is broken.

Block 50,000 reached. POS only now.

Do some transactions by moving coins around in chunks > 15 to get the chain moving along. It seems that the chain only moves when tx are made, you can watch this in the block explorer. I think the reward of 0.01 is very small. Maybe the dev can comment.

With enough lube it should be a smooth ride to success  

Determine:

1) What is the essence of the coin
2) Roots of the coin
3) Future view of the coin and vision

Once this is determined, then the name must encapsulate the vision for the right reasons. Changing a name just for a listing is also not right. If the decision is to be generic, then pics of anal jokes etc. will not be appropriate anymore in order to accommodate all the other uses. Also, if the sexual connotation will remain somewhere in the mix then exchanges might still view it as inappropriate, although it might become more palatable because something like Bitcoin can for example also be used to buy adult related stuff.

Also, the powers at be must decide what is worse, porn or drugs since coins with drug names are listed? C-Cex for example listed CANN which is a drug and in many places against the law. As good an exchange as C-Cex is (and I really like them), looking at this seems a bit hypocritical to me and feels like a form of discrimination against certain sections of society. It seems strange to allow drugs, but sex which is part of all human beings and required for the future of human kind is taboo.

It might be good at this point to get input from the dev as well as he had a certain vision for the coin.

In real life a company's solvency (value on paper) is assets - liabilities in the balance sheet. Assets can further be broken down into tangible and intangible assets. Intangible assets consist of things like brand name, goodwill, patents, intellectual property etc.

When looking at coins I am thinking more and more that there is a good correlation between a coin and a company and that these aspects form the fundamentals for success and measurement thereof. Just like a company, a coin's success are impacted by management team (dynamics, ethics, skills, actions etc.), vision, strategy, goals, product (usability, quality, demand for), time to market, support etc. Value is further impacted by aspects like discount of future cash flows e.g. POS staking (dividends/interest) and the possibility of selling at a higher price in future, as well as demand for the product. Price is where supply = demand. So far DarkCoin has delivered strongly on many of the above aspects and as a POW coin there is no future cash flows like POS staking, however a strong demand has been created. The demand has been driven by strong management team that delivers, usability and features of the product as well as a general positive sentiment for the future.

The above has been captured in an intangible asset on the "balance sheet" and incapsulated in the DarkCoin brand that everyone has become accustomed with. Everyone has been talking about DRK as one of the few real contenders for Bitcoin. It is my humble opinion that the rebranding has caused damage to the brand and reading the thread since it seems to have opened up some rifts in management etc. The change in name seems furthermore to be coupled by a change in vision. These are good things to do in times of distress e.g. when things are in a bad state or when business rescue is required or perhaps during a merger. It is extremely high risk actions to do in good times when an existing model is working great. The risk of doing these things in good times is that intangible assets can be severely impacted or even destroyed. (lets see if this becomes a use case in the subject "Destruction of brand 101"). Lets say Coca Cola decides to change its colors from red and white to orange and brown and to change the name to FizzyDrinks. What do you think will happen?

There was nothing wrong with the vision, strategy, goals and product of DRK. Why change something that is not broken? People have a right to privacy. Products will always be used for unintended purposes, from firearms to bricks to airplanes. If the  change in vision was to move away from the connotations with some of the unintended uses of the coin, then it will not work by just changing the name. If you produce guns and think that changing the name from "gun" to "daisy" will stop it from being lethal then think again. If that is the purpose of the change in vision, then change the attributes of the underlying product so that it becomes less useful for unintended purposes.

However, if management insists on destroying intangible assets and is of the opinion that the new brand will be worth more than the destruction of the old, then the choice of name becomes very important. Dash seems very fluffy and flowery and although the name is based on fairly ok ground words of Digital and Cash, using the acronym (in an analogy) for Secure Hashing Integrated and Trusted does not mean it is the best choice. Looking at the last posts of alleged management members acting alone etc. it seems that there are some issues? I could be wrong. The most common aspect so far for coins losing value and in many cases leading to its demise is management action/non-action.

There is one exception that I have to mention and that is regulation. Regulation and law enforcement are valid reasons if that was the force behind the change. The only purposes imo for alt coins is to be a breeding ground for innovation and creating the virtual currency of the future which will without doubt attract all aspects of society each for its own purpose. This can be compared to the lawlessness of the Wild West in the 1800s and today there are beautiful civilised cities in the west of the US. I have no doubt in my mind that virtual currency in one form or another is the way of the future. In order for virtual currencies to succeed there needs to be a balance between coin futures, regulation and law enforcement including AML and the answer lies somewhere in the middle. Regulation is inevitable and it is not a matter of if but when.

Ill watch the future of Dark I mean Dash to see how it unfolds and who knows, maybe I am wrong and the new name will make a big positive difference.

I notice on the block explorer that 10% of the blocks are POS blocks. This means at end of POW there might be just 135,000 coins in circulation instead of 150,000.

Not paycoin but paycon.    Just ignore the trolls.

This cannot be a unique problem.

It is in the interest of transparency. I am not saying something is wrong, I am saying solve for this first to show people you are transparent and then do a website or whatever is on the list. If you don't know why such analysis is important then I am amazed. People want to know the risk they are facing before they invest. Someone did not do their homework before launching a coin.

You must get the priorities right. First thing is to make a proper block explorer that is accurate that indicates the rich list and total coin supply, to prove that the other block explorer indicating a double total coin supply really had an error. If you don't do this, people will not trust you. If there is nothing to hide just do it so that things can go on. After this you can work on a website.

Still no block explorer with rich list and total coin supply I see.

Pity.

Great stuff. Well done.