SUGGESTION: A Sticky/Thread Of Dead Coins?

[bathrobehero]

Dead is really relative here which is why I think this is a bad idea. People are eager to throw around "dead coin" even when the dev is not online for two days or people are calling Maxcoin dead since months. As far as I'm concerned calling a coin dead is just trolling.

[gjhiggins]

Like I said I can maintain a fairly good list if need be.

We can see your “fairly good” and raise you a “comprehensive”:

* Listed by name: http://minkiz.co/coin/name/
* Listed by symbol http://minkiz.co/coin/symbol/
* Listed with mugshot http://minkiz.co/coin/

We're striving to publish the list as Linked Open Data - there's a LOD browser (http://minkiz.co/lod), a SPARQL endpoint (http://minkiz.co/sparql)
and an associated OWL ontology specialised to cryptocurrency: DOACC, a Description of a CryptoCurrency, browsable on http://minkiz.co/ontology/doacc.

It's all published as Open Source ofc (both abox and tbox): http://github.com/DOACC

It will be all relative determination . At least and update on each coin that is close to death can take place in the updated thread.

The absence of a complete list may have caused you to underestimate the magnitude of the task.

Cryddit maintains the Necronomicon (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=588413.0), a list of dead coins, published as an updated thread. Nice effort, shame about the publishing engine, we thought - hence our taking the Linked Open Data route.

I strongly urge you to heed the caveat about the difficulty of working without an operational definition of your primary discriminator. And at best, it can only be an ostensive definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostensive_definition) with all the contention and controversy that implies.

Cheers,

Graham

Edited format