much better

I don't have my grandmother around to translate the Swedish (or force me to eat Lutefisk), so I'll have to stick with English for now.

Months? I doubt it will be that long.

for those watching...

You have now entered, "The Profit Taking Zone"

True on both sides, thanks for the great trade ralree.

pausing at the top of the coaster, is it a drop or another hill next?

AND they are at CES, could be a few folks are making a decision to get in the game.

You might want to find a way to link to it that to the US English site as well, right now a search on the store in the US does not show the app, but your direct link does work.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/apps

I'd love to do more, but browsing the store is the limit for me until I get a VM running Win8 or take the leap and switch. I've got a LOT of baggage and work stuff to consider, so it's not an easy matrix to solve.

Thanks to you, and all the other great traders in this thread. it's been a pleasure, without exception.

Here is the list so far for FRC:
maaku: 1 FRC back and forth, yay a transaction!
galambo: Kudos for being willing to overpay based on an earlier commitment
un-named user: agreed to sell part of his 800k+ FRC, discovered he was in an isolated branch with 1 peer and 0 FRC. Sale called off for obvious reasons.
Jutrul: Easy trade
Rubberduckie x2: Good communication
bushstar x2: Straightforward trade
Abandoner: pending (think he is sleeping)
ralree: quick and easy
meebs: Flexible Trade

Hmmm, there's a thought too, although I think the network will have to be a bit more transaction saturated before that will really work unless you have a massive percentage of the hashing power.


No, I'm only assuming that SOME of the BTC sold are mined, and reduction in mining output would reduce total supply by some fraction, but I'm not naive enough to think that it will be 1:1. The bandwagon effect would most likely be bigger than the miners restricted supply if it took off.

For example, if the open mining partnership decided that they would hold all but 20% of their coins (assuming that 20% covers electricity and operating costs for members, the numbers would have to be workable, these are just thrown out there), offer 20% of the held coins listed at a published price 10% above market (specific number, not fluctuating all the time, changing daily, weekly or monthly as the group desires), 10% of the coins listed at a published price 20% over market, and the final 50% in cold storage for the future. If this mining group controls 20% of coin production then the impact to the coin supply from mining then over the next period of time only 84% of the potential coins (3600*.84=3024 coins a day) and that would be without anyone else choosing to save their coins.


I am not saying this is the most awesome idea in the world, or that we should do it for sure, but I've seen this topic come up a few times and I'm wondering if we can come up with something that scratches the "cartel itch" that some folks have, but without the secret dealings and mob-like mentality. So, can we find something to scratch the itch without giving the cartel guys a knife to stab us with later?

Thinking a bit more about it, keeping it unmerged during the early stage does allow better tracking of interest levels, once it's merged you lose that visibility and independence because you have miners that could care less about FRC right along with the ones that do.

I also think that merged mining should be a bit of a "graduation" or a promotion to the big-leagues. It gets you the best possible security, and you are willing to give up the visibility for that when there is real value being generated. Ideally the coin should have a non-mining-related value that is somewhat self sustaining before subjecting the market to a horde of  bitcoin/profit focused miners that are apathetic about FRC.


+1

Not quite dead, everyone was so busy attacking his newbie mistake that you may have missed another way that a cartel could operate.

You don't have to control mining supply, you only have to control the amount being released. So everybody in the cartel open partnership can agree to only sell a small fraction of their Mined BTC. This would constrain the market supply while allowing members to cover costs, but not cash out completely. To help drive market price even more there could be a second percentage of coins that Members will offer for sale at a premium price on exchanges and private party purchases. This would likely have a bandwagon effect among non-members as well.

Not sure if it is practical or if enough folks are interested to matter, but it might behoove us to design something very open and loose that will fill the gap where the "cartel" mentalityight live later. Even just a web page where folks could make their individual pledges and current thresholds for buy/sell could cover over the gap in an interesting way.

Another aspect I've been thinking about is either private or public sharing of expansion plans among members, with a specific goal to maximize their portion.

Please recreate your currency and reset the blockchain for me too, I'm sure that's easy right? /sarc

Either you want FRC merge-mined, or your don't. I don't think changing the coin is going to happen, so which is it? You are a year and change late to the party on this one, it's not a new idea, they are looking for help though.

Personally I'd like to see it remain independent until the foundation is fully funded and the funds disbursed (or maybe 1 year of disbursing all available funds.) Enabling merged mining will be a virtual guarantee of perpetual operation of the coin, sounds like a good carrot  to dangle until the foundation does their job...

Apparently I misunderstood your point when you mentioned my name in the subsequent post to the one I quoted. Since he was pointing out a mistake in my logic related to math, I didn't connect that you would be taking him down for some completely different reason.

My apologies, and I hope you can understand the reaction.

Me neither at this point, don't feel bad

Thanks for the feedback, I'll come back at this later and see if I can figure out what happened.

I'm a little insulted that you think you know me so well. I'm not having a misunderstanding in ANY of those areas, and I've been defending YOUR position as well I believe, which causes me to be a bit amazed that you feel I need to go back to basics. Especially after you chimed in with a list of 3 things to add to my list (of which 2 were actually covered in the list at least partially.)

My misunderstanding is in statistical math, specifically econometrics, which I have almost no experience with. I have been following IPCC reports, US govt reports, I followed the ozone hole scare, I followed CFC regulation and it's results, and just this morning I was looking at pictures of ice floe coverage and a couple polar bears on a blog. This is not something that I do every day, or systematically, but it has fascinated me for years and I feed my fascinations as much science as they can stomach.

You might want to reconsider your way of interacting with folks, I'm pretty unimpressed.

Hmm, I must have misunderstood something. This was from that blog post from yesterday, the one explaining how they had invalid tests being performed and they were failing to reject the presence of the unit root. I'll have to look at it again.

maybe it was a stochastic variable, not system or I'm making another semantic error. You obviously know a bit about it, care to share with the class?

And tell them they are morons, then come on back. You really will be joining the majority, and most of us will welcome you. (although, I'm still not convinced that you are a "denier" in the first place, please correct me if I am wrong.)

I'm a Yankee living in The South (southeastern USA excluding southern FL), and I've learned that slow is not always bad, although EM did have me saying "Bless his Heart."

Myrkul (finally pronounced that in my head, nice) I've enjoyed the spirited debate, let me know if you have questions, that one of the way I learn more too. I'm not an expert by any means, but I have been following this to one degree or another since the 90's (when I was very skeptical of it) and I even check in on the heartland institute and WUWT on occasion, even if they usually do just make me want to laugh or cry, at the naked punditry they are hawking.

FA does have a point about the manipulative tactics that have been getting more and more ridiculous over time to try to limit the impact of the entire climate science community. There is a LOT of money behind the status quo, and you can see it moving the levers that drive a lot of sockpuppetry. Our recent elections were just one example of this.

1ScrybeSNcjqgpPeYNgvdxANArqoC6i5u

Thank you!


1 more difference for you:
Foundation = their job, you = a volentary magnanimous gesture

buying up to 10k FRC for BTC0.3/1000FRC
Filled, thanks ralree, bushstar, and rubberduckie

I'm currently restocking BTC, once I get some more in I will be buying FRC again, Please PM me.

I will also sell FRC if you need some, I accept BTC, PPC, LTC, and TRC.

as long as by always you mean the first 3 years...