Anyone who has been following hodl knows there have been some questionable decisions made by the dev claiming it was "majority" voting for it. Some of us called out what seemed very questionable choices, and subsequently had our posts deleted. Now the coin is crashing, the hash rate is in the gutter, and the dev is proposing a new tax to pay "developers" other than himself. When I raised significant concerns about all of it, not the least of which is that he could easily siphon off all of the funds to himself through shell "developer" accounts my posts were all deleted too. He actually said he expected a robust debate, but by deleting any post that disagrees he is trying to make it look like everyone agrees and will force the change on everyone.
I am sure none of this comes as a surprise to anyone, but I thought I would post for anyone naive enough to think it is still a legit coin. Feel free to post here for unmoderated discussion of the coin and proposals. I am moved on to less questionable coins, but I hate to see others get caught off guard by a questionable developer who deletes all posts questioning his decision.
Including my posts below for documentation:
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
So... Coin is still alive or no? Volume of tradings are little, mining on pools unavailable etc... Or happy future will be?
P.S. Sorry for my english...
coins still alive and working just avoid trading from yobit as the dev stated from above post wallet still in maintenance we needed to wait for some update to avoid delayed mate.
That's your opinion. With almost no hashrate, no pools, and no trading volume anywhere, and a rapid drop in value due to the fundamentals of the coin being changed on a whim, I disagree. I think it is dead and even rolling back this very buggy and ill-advised change probably won't save it.
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
that isn't what ocminer said at all. he simply stated that his time is limited and his current interests are with other projects. how the hell do you get "stopped caring because the coin will die" out of that!? Your personal opinions are yours to have, but don't put words in other people's mouths.
I was reading between the lines based on other posts, and it looks like I was right. The change took away all reward for pools and miners, so the pools have no motivation to do development to fix a screwed up decision when their rewards are a year away. For the same reason there is almost no hash rate left. Very few think it will be profitable when the year comes around.
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
We have a problem, HOdlcoin is running out of resources.
By that, I mean the amount of time, money, development and network services that people are willing to volunteer and donate to the HOdlcoin project. While users have been very generous so far, there is a limit that is reached and I think we are up against it. This curtails future development, promotion and network growth.
I want to start a discussion on a proposal to address this. I want to allow two weeks for discussion before formulating a Nutocracy motion. I expect this to be controversial and for robust argument to take place, and modifications to be made, but hopefully, by the end of it, we'll have found a motion that has wide support among HOdlers.
So without further ado, here it is.
Proposal: Create a budget to be used for promotion, development, network services.
How: Hard fork required to mine additional 50HODL (unhodled) to budget address if block number is divisible by 20.
Who: I will volunteer to administer fund. To avoid conflict of interest, I won't pay myself for any work, my contributions will continue to be voluntary.
Limits: Fund administrator to have discretionary spending, but should accept direction from Nutocracy motions to spend/not spend.
I'm hoping this will put HOdlcoin on a firm footing to pay for network services (nodes, block explorers, faucets etc), promotion (advertising, articles, twitter campaigns), development. It should also give HOdlers more power as they can vote for things that require a budget.
The problem is, you took away the reward by killing off mining. Now you are trying to fix it in a self-serving way by giving yourself full control of a huge slush fund of coins you can pay to "other developers" aka friends. This idea may be even worse than the idea to kill off mining. So I am sure it will pass with a "majority".
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
I expect this to be controversial and for robust argument to take place, and modifications to be made, but hopefully, by the end of it, we'll have found a motion that has wide support among HOdlers.
Why would you say you expect a robust argument, then delete any post that calls out legitimate concerns about your proposal? Can you please tell us if you actually want a legitimate discussion or if you were just saying that to make the change seem unanimous?
