 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »
|
Mintpal have suspended Deposits and Withdrawals of Supercoin.
Cryptsy are still trading normally. In the absence of a working current wallet it is impossible to say whether deposits/withdrawals are working correctly.
you can use this non anon version v.1.6.1 to test https://mega.co.nz/#!B1pXBLIY!YbkCC0d0gdsyV69UupvFFnzNGMjH0gSt6dOAw2RKlUs Thanks, but as I pointed out in my previous post, the Link that You Supply is an UPLOAD Link to Mega. Try it yourself and see. I cannot use it to DOWNLOAD the wallet. Thats because you clicking the link which is https://mega.co.nz/ but if you copy the whole thing it'll take you to the actual download place like this https://mega.co.nz/#!B1pXBLIY!YbkCC0d0gdsyV69UupvFFnzNGMjH0gSt6dOAw2RKlUsSorry. Should have realised it wouldn't be straightforward. Thanks for making it work. (edit... it got to 94% and froze) Is it wise to post an active Upload address in a public forum? sorry Thistleblower but sometimes i really ask myself where does common sense start and where does it end... thats the main page of mega, they are definitely more than happy to welcome you on board to use their upload service  this is straight forward ... just copy the whole link, the whole link was not clickable on purpose  however, and post important, did it work? It froze at 94%. I haven't tried it again. But wouldn't it make sense to post a direct link to the necessary Download... instead of a link that takes you to the Upload service? I merely ask out of curiosity. No doubt there's a perfectly good technical reason for departing from the convention used to download the 3.1 wallet which is still available to those who wish to remain on the wrong fork. |
|
|
|
Mintpal have suspended Deposits and Withdrawals of Supercoin.
Cryptsy are still trading normally. In the absence of a working current wallet it is impossible to say whether deposits/withdrawals are working correctly.
you can use this non anon version v.1.6.1 to test https://mega.co.nz/#!B1pXBLIY!YbkCC0d0gdsyV69UupvFFnzNGMjH0gSt6dOAw2RKlUs Thanks, but as I pointed out in my previous post, the Link that You Supply is an UPLOAD Link to Mega. Try it yourself and see. I cannot use it to DOWNLOAD the wallet. Thats because you clicking the link which is https://mega.co.nz/ but if you copy the whole thing it'll take you to the actual download place like this https://mega.co.nz/#!B1pXBLIY!YbkCC0d0gdsyV69UupvFFnzNGMjH0gSt6dOAw2RKlUsSorry. Should have realised it wouldn't be straightforward. Thanks for making it work. (edit... it got to 94% and froze) Is it wise to post an active Upload address in a public forum? |
|
|
|
Mintpal have suspended Deposits and Withdrawals of Supercoin.
Cryptsy are still trading normally. In the absence of a working current wallet it is impossible to say whether deposits/withdrawals are working correctly.
you can use this non anon version v.1.6.1 to test https://mega.co.nz/#!B1pXBLIY!YbkCC0d0gdsyV69UupvFFnzNGMjH0gSt6dOAw2RKlUs Thanks, but as I pointed out in my previous post, the Link that You Supply is an UPLOAD Link to Mega. Try it yourself and see. I cannot use it to DOWNLOAD the wallet. |
|
|
|
|
STAKING ISSUES
This is probably not a good time to launch a new topic, but as wallet issues are under review it's probably as good as any.
My observations apply equally to Supercoin and Mammothcoin.
I purchase a block of coins (say 1000) from an exchange and transfer them to a wallet. For the first 24hrs they are 'immature' and yield no reward.
The coins are left to stake with No Further Deposits or Withrawals to that wallet
Day 1... after 24 hrs the wallet starts staking and mines One Block of approx 3 coins (0.3% of stake) staking the full 1000 coins.
Day 2... The Wallet mines Two blocks of approx 1.5 coins staking half of the total each time in Two sessions.
Day 3... The Wallet mines Four blocks of approx 0.75 coins staking a quarter of the total each time in four sessions.
Day 4... The wallet mines Eight Blocks of approx 0.375 coins staking an eighth of the total each time in eight sessions...
And so on. The amount staked in each session seems to be halving each day. So although the total amount of reward each day remains fairly constant, the number of blocks generated each day is increasing exponentially. Is there any limit to this, or will the reward continue fragmenting indefinitely?
|
|
|
|
|
Mintpal have suspended Deposits and Withdrawals of Supercoin.
Cryptsy are still trading normally. In the absence of a working current wallet it is impossible to say whether deposits/withdrawals are working correctly.
|
|
|
|
The First link takes us to the Block Explorer. The Second link is an UPLOAD Link to Mega. And just adding to the confusion... the Download link for Version 3.1 is still active on Page 1 of this thread. Is there any risk of a link to download the Current version of the wallet? |
|
|
|
We came to hard decision after reviewing two block chains and found that the blockchain used by exchange bittrex is mostly used, so we will revert back to that blockchain, so the impact to people will be the minimum. and we will work in favor of exchanges.
this appear less harm for the most. We act on good of most or all.
So it's means there will be another fork, we have to again download everything to resolve problem. We will simply follow bittrex chain. We are working on the new version now. Ok, but please do this last time, last some days we are facing so much problem. And hope after that it will resolve everything because it's not good for community to take these problem and they suffer. I have a nasty feeling that I'm supporting a move which will result in the loss of my own coin. I've shut down my wallet and I'll wait to see what's there when the new version is released. Lets hope all the exchanges are singing from the same hymn sheet. |
|
|
|
We came to hard decision after reviewing two block chains. and we will work in favor of exchanges.
this appear less harm for the most. We act on good of most or all.
we will revert check points in favor of exchanges.
Please ensure that All exchanges are on The Same Fork. Exchanges please Work With Each Other to resolve this issue. DO Not leave it all up to the Developers. They have decided to act in Everyone's Best Interests. Your Cooperation and Involvement will Make or Break this decision. |
|
|
|
I can see reasoning in every side of the story...
- Bittrex could have acted faster. Reports of missing coins to Bittrex started 7 days ago! You can't just blame the devs surely.
- Devs could have acted faster. Faster block explorer update could have helped although it was a bit outside of dev's control.
- Users acted fastest. Many stopped transferring very early on. Reported it to Bittrex, devs etc. But we are losing out...
Exchanges can't act without a functioning block explorer to monitor the chain. The developers dragged thier heels for days after the issues came to light. Responses were always couched in terms of denial, or misleading advice. Strong leadership was required, and none was made available. |
|
|
|
And I'm not the only one.
There are people who could lose more than I.
I am mentally preparing myself as I would have lost everything, because, with this kind of events, that's real possibility too...
The Community (even those of us who think our coin are safe) would like a fair solution. The developers and exchanges remain obdurate. I have suggested a reduction in pos reward to allow losers a fresh stake on the current blockchain. But the principle players will only act if the community shows solidarity... even at a cost to ourselves. I reject the arrogance and complacency of the Management Team. |
|
|
|
Please read my previous response. If you don't understand the ramifications of your actions and are not willing to work with us, there is nothing more I can do to help this community. Given your stance, we will be reverting to the old fork. If someone can explain the situation and the necessary solutions more clearly, please do so  And for the record It was very simple, we have some reports about forking, some said yes some said no, we could not be sure, we checked our nodes, no problem there. We watched the issue few days.
If you knew of potential problems and didn't tell anyone, and then didn't update the official block explorer when you "fixed" the problem. The fault lies with you. We already made sure we followed your block explorer. Thanks richie@bittrex I don't get your point there. If you see many reports there for missing coins, you should suspend the trading and investigate. You did not do that, you missed it, now you try to blame the dev. It is your job to watch all the coins trading in your exchange. You are the only one to watch it, not dev, not other people. When you have issues, consult with the dev or check the coin thread. It is as simple as that, I don't see your points trying to find a scapegoat there. When the wallet was updated the Block Explorer was Not updated. The Block Explorer is the tool used to investigate the Blockchain. Maintenance of the tools (wallet and explorer) is the responsibility of the Developers. But neither side is willing to compromise in order to help Investors. And if it's left like that then whichever fork wins, this coin has zero chance of survival. The situation creates no confidence for the future. Explorers are not done by dev team, we informed as soon as possible the dev for explorer and helped to get it fixed. Again fork is a common problem. Exchanges are responsible to watch it and suspend trading as needed. The dev team will help as much as we can to resolve the issues. The day after the wallet update. So exchanges were left watching the blockchain with the wrong explorer and Investors were led to the wrong fork. This is essentially a Management Problem and the fault lies in the complacency of the Supercoin Management Team. Refusal to accept any responsibility merely compounds the errors. |
|
|
|
Q2: Why fork happen?
A2: Fork happens due to network hash / pos generation unevenly, and also faster block time (which makes transactions a lot faster) may cause forking problems. This fork problem is very common in the alt coins. Most coins have fork issues at one point. Nothing is strange there. When fork occurs, dev team usually release a new version with more checkpoints that block the forked chain. Once everyone use the correct chain, fork will die.
Thanks all for your patience and support.
Fork will die along with any coin on that fork. So is this the roadmap for the future? More forks more fixes and more losses? Because uneven pos generation and faster block times will continue to be fundamental properties of the coin. I should add that my remaining coin are in the latest wallet and staking with approx 30% rejects. This compares with Mammothcoin staking with about 2% rejects. Both using the same codebase. |
|
|
|
Please read my previous response. If you don't understand the ramifications of your actions and are not willing to work with us, there is nothing more I can do to help this community. Given your stance, we will be reverting to the old fork. If someone can explain the situation and the necessary solutions more clearly, please do so And for the record It was very simple, we have some reports about forking, some said yes some said no, we could not be sure, we checked our nodes, no problem there. We watched the issue few days.
If you knew of potential problems and didn't tell anyone, and then didn't update the official block explorer when you "fixed" the problem. The fault lies with you. We already made sure we followed your block explorer. Thanks richie@bittrex I don't get your point there. If you see many reports there for missing coins, you should suspend the trading and investigate. You did not do that, you missed it, now you try to blame the dev. It is your job to watch all the coins trading in your exchange. You are the only one to watch it, not dev, not other people. When you have issues, consult with the dev or check the coin thread. It is as simple as that, I don't see your points trying to find a scapegoat there. When the wallet was updated the Block Explorer was Not updated. The Block Explorer is the tool used to investigate the Blockchain. Maintenance of the tools (wallet and explorer) is the responsibility of the Developers. But neither side is willing to compromise in order to help Investors. And if it's left like that then whichever fork wins, this coin has zero chance of survival. The situation creates no confidence for the future. |
|
|
|
what is the thing called official explorer? does Bitcoin has such a thing or concept? We alerted fairglue about update and you can see his posts on the matter.
I am still behind my word about better advertisement for you.
That would be the explorer released or promoted by the Supercoin Team, along with the Wallet, and referred to on Page One of this thread, along with all the elaborate promotional material. |
|
|
|
we still wait confirmation from exchanges. And our solution is here any one with good intention who follows the thread or github source can see updates in time. it is not hard to code few lines to follow github changes. https://github.com/supercoinproject/supercoinPlease Explain how this helps Investors recover their coin from the wrong fork. Please Explain how the Fork happened in the first place. Please Explain what you are doing to prevent this from happening again. |
|
|
|
We truly working on this and over 4 days we put much effort here than any other party.
Also SuperMultipool has still collecting BTCs because we dont know exchanges on stil fork or not yet payment were possible. As soon as we have a good exchange , the pool will buy from there those all past coins. We asked again these exchanges whats up with them.
We also now testing few more things to see if anything else we can do.
These lame excuses in broken English are sounding like a bad Hollywood script. I can't make any sense of this one, but I suspect that's the point. Compare with your other announcements in perfect English. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not saying (yet) it was a scam from the outset... but I'm seriously wondering if the 'trustless anonymous' claims were ever substantiated. In the meanwhile there's no cooperation between developers and exchanges, and the price is falling like a stone. Is a relaunch now even a viable proposition... as ClusterfuckCoin perhaps?
|
|
|
|
@Richie i want you to understand, we as dev team are not trying to lose you. I told this also at irc chat. After your first post, i posted my answer and came to IRC in less than 2 hours I speak about myself i am not the all dev team but decisions taken like fork or extra coin minting together as team. I said you what i can do like putting in front of others more ads and future business. This is not a way of saying go away. We still hold bittex in OP and want to keep so. So i wait from you the decision please do your best to handle, i am not an exchange manager. and certainly you are a good one. So you do your job and allow me i do mine. thx. for post and hope you give our community some good news  So, if I read this right, you're rejecting the proposals already on the table, and waiting for the exchanges to propose something that you find acceptable. In the meanwhile investors are facing the prospect of being left heavily out of pocket with a coin operating on Two (or more) forks. If this isn't resolved very soon the coin will be Dead and the matter will be academic. No other exchanges will trust a coin in terminal decline with developers and exchanges fighting over who's to blame. It's not just the job of the exchanges to monitor the health of the coin. The developers have a responsibility to monitor it's progress and ensure that it is working without issues. Other coins have weathered similar storms through Hard Work, Hard Forks, Cooperation and Compromise. Pleas make it happen while there's still some goodwill left in the community. The fact that this post leads off with "So, if I read this right...." furthers the point that the largest trouble here is communication and understanding. Dev, if you are working for the good of the coin, team, & community, you will be more fluid with your ideas for conflict resolution. Working through this whilst opposing exchanges will breed contempt and distrust from the investors. Working through this cooperatively with exchanges will show solidarity and build trust amongst investors. Your counter proposal of 'I said you what i can do like putting in front of others more ads and future business.' speaks in terms of potential future payouts. Your asking the exchange to take on more potential risk for one of many possible outcomes. In short, you're demanding respect from the exchange that isn't yet entirely deserved. There has to be a more neutral solution. Why cant we just roll back trades & blockchain to before the fork and restart from there? [I'm not technical, so if this is absurd, excuse me.] You can cancel all transactions form any point that you choose... but you can't force the return of any goods or bitcoin not connected to the blockchain. Reconstruction or reinstatement of those transactions would seem virtually impossible. So anyone who's bought coins or sold goods and services on the wrong fork has effectively lost out. And it's not yet certain which is the 'wrong' fork, as the exchanges control a significant portion of the blockchain. Yes, that's right. However , it's important to distinguish 'Trades' from 'Transactions' . Transactions either happened on the correct fork, or didn't happen, and coins will be back where they started (not lost) when everyone is on the correct fork. 'Trades' are buys or sells for other currencies, and therefore there is a potential loser if they are rolled back. That is the important distinction for an exchange and its customers. If I charge you a fee for handing out advice, and you pay me say, 100000 Super, then that is a transaction. If the 100000 super are on the 'wrong' fork, then a rollback will return the 100000 super to your wallet, (unless you accepted them on the wrong fork, in payment for a BMW, say) leaving me to seek payment all over again. The same applies even without a fork, if the blockchain is rolled back and restarted. Needless to say, any POS coins issued after the rollback point will become void, thus adding to the confusion. And the chaos merely increases as the situation drags on, with (potentially) multiple forks each generating their own coin and transactions. |
|
|
|
@Richie i want you to understand, we as dev team are not trying to lose you. I told this also at irc chat. After your first post, i posted my answer and came to IRC in less than 2 hours I speak about myself i am not the all dev team but decisions taken like fork or extra coin minting together as team. I said you what i can do like putting in front of others more ads and future business. This is not a way of saying go away. We still hold bittex in OP and want to keep so. So i wait from you the decision please do your best to handle, i am not an exchange manager. and certainly you are a good one. So you do your job and allow me i do mine. thx. for post and hope you give our community some good news So, if I read this right, you're rejecting the proposals already on the table, and waiting for the exchanges to propose something that you find acceptable. In the meanwhile investors are facing the prospect of being left heavily out of pocket with a coin operating on Two (or more) forks. If this isn't resolved very soon the coin will be Dead and the matter will be academic. No other exchanges will trust a coin in terminal decline with developers and exchanges fighting over who's to blame. It's not just the job of the exchanges to monitor the health of the coin. The developers have a responsibility to monitor it's progress and ensure that it is working without issues. Other coins have weathered similar storms through Hard Work, Hard Forks, Cooperation and Compromise. Pleas make it happen while there's still some goodwill left in the community. The fact that this post leads off with "So, if I read this right...." furthers the point that the largest trouble here is communication and understanding. Dev, if you are working for the good of the coin, team, & community, you will be more fluid with your ideas for conflict resolution. Working through this whilst opposing exchanges will breed contempt and distrust from the investors. Working through this cooperatively with exchanges will show solidarity and build trust amongst investors. Your counter proposal of 'I said you what i can do like putting in front of others more ads and future business.' speaks in terms of potential future payouts. Your asking the exchange to take on more potential risk for one of many possible outcomes. In short, you're demanding respect from the exchange that isn't yet entirely deserved. There has to be a more neutral solution. Why cant we just roll back trades & blockchain to before the fork and restart from there? [I'm not technical, so if this is absurd, excuse me.] You can cancel all transactions form any point that you choose... but you can't force the return of any goods or bitcoin not connected to the blockchain. Reconstruction or reinstatement of those transactions would seem virtually impossible. So anyone who's bought coins or sold goods and services on the wrong fork has effectively lost out. And it's not yet certain which is the 'wrong' fork, as the exchanges control a significant portion of the blockchain. |
|
|
|
@Richie i want you to understand, we as dev team are not trying to lose you. I told this also at irc chat. After your first post, i posted my answer and came to IRC in less than 2 hours I speak about myself i am not the all dev team but decisions taken like fork or extra coin minting together as team. I said you what i can do like putting in front of others more ads and future business. This is not a way of saying go away. We still hold bittex in OP and want to keep so. So i wait from you the decision please do your best to handle, i am not an exchange manager. and certainly you are a good one. So you do your job and allow me i do mine. thx. for post and hope you give our community some good news So, if I read this right, you're rejecting the proposals already on the table, and waiting for the exchanges to propose something that you find acceptable. In the meanwhile investors are facing the prospect of being left heavily out of pocket with a coin operating on Two (or more) forks. If this isn't resolved very soon the coin will be Dead and the matter will be academic. No other exchanges will trust a coin in terminal decline with developers and exchanges fighting over who's to blame. It's not just the job of the exchanges to monitor the health of the coin. The developers have a responsibility to monitor it's progress and ensure that it is working without issues. Other coins have weathered similar storms through Hard Work, Hard Forks, Cooperation and Compromise. Pleas make it happen while there's still some goodwill left in the community. |
|
|
|
|
