[DASH] Dash - Building the IoM | Dash Nation Progress Thread

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

I'm not arguing about the instamine. It happened. A lot of coins were mined in the first 48 hours. That is a fact. Did Evan mine all of them? Impossible to say. Did Evan deliberately perpetrate a scam? No evidence has been presented to back that up.

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years.

But the conjecture doesn't just end with the instamine. It's now Dash is bad crypto, Dash is centralized, Dash is just Evan's way or the highway.

They are fighting hard to have you believe this bias. Five school-boy bullies visited this thread at the same time to try and ram it down my throat....

By this point, to the lurkers of this thread, it's plain to see that some individuals have felt the need to spread this narrative due to the fact that they are threatened by the truth, which is that Dash is an incredible project. It has the decentralized team, technology, governance and funding to one day be the digital cash that Satoshi envisioned, the Internet Of Money.

Dash Nation represents positivity, progress, innovation and decentralized tech. Join us and see for yourself. We would love to have you with us, building a community around Dash.

Cheers,

Tao (Dash Nation Campaign Founder)

[smooth]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years.

Where is the "false narrative"? These are all objective factual statements:

1. Evan had at least two years of experience with crypto before launching Dash. There was no "lack of experience" as you claim. (Your statement about what "caused mistakes to be made" was opinion, by the way. I'm glad we have agreed to exclude opinion from this thread.)

2. Evan stated months ahead of the launch that he was working on a "for-profit" coin launch.

3. Evan deliberately withheld the development and feature plans until after the end of the instqamine.

4. Evan misled people about the launch schedule, launching much earlier than promised. During the first hour, over 500000 coins were mined, and in 8 hours, over a million coins.

5. Evan later cut the mining rewards and coin supply, increasing the effective size of the instamine by a factor of four or more.

6. In total, the instamine of 2 million coins represents over 30% of the current supply of Dash.

7. "Official Communication" from Dash blaming the instamine on inherited Litecoin code (which is factually false).

8. Dash ANN OP claiming the coin was "fairly and transparently launched".

If there is any "false narrative" here, it is the claims like "fairly and transparently launched" which are being made by Dash.

BTW, "a lot of coins were mined in the first 48 hours" is misleading spin. A lot of coins were mined within one one hour of the early launch, and then in the first 6-8 hours. The rest of the 48 hours was just icing on the cake.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years.

Where is the "false narrative"? These are all objective factual statements:

1. Evan had at least two years of experience with crypto before launching Dash. There was no "lack of experience" as you claim. (Your statement about what "caused mistakes to be made" was opinion, by the way. I'm glad we have agreed to exclude opinion from this thread.)

2. Evan stated months ahead of the launch that he was working on a "for-profit" coin launch.

3. Evan deliberately withheld the development and feature plans until after the end of the instqamine.

4. Evan misled people about the launch schedule, launching much earlier than promised. During the first hour, over 500000 coins were mined, and in 8 hours, over a million coins.

5. Evan later cut the mining rewards and coin supply, increasing the effective size of the instamine by a factor of four or more.

6. In total, the instamine of 2 million coins represents over 30% of the current supply of Dash.

7. "Official Communication" from Dash blaming the instamine on inherited Litecoin code (which is factually false).

8. Dash ANN OP claiming the coin was "fairly and transparently launched".

If there is any "false narrative" here, it is the claims like "fairly and transparently launched" which are being made by Dash.

BTW, "a lot of coins were mined in the first 48 hours" is misleading spin. A lot of coins were mined within one one hour of the early launch, and then in the first 6-8 hours. The rest of the 48 hours was just icing on the cake.

Smooth, I thought you were better than this. Don't make me post a link to the Allen Iverson video again! Some facts, some spin.

1. Fact
2. Fact
3. Conjecture (Not Fact)
4. Conjecture (The launch time was posted)
5. Fact
6. Fact
7. There is a basis for saying that
8. Conjecture

Some facts and some conjecture. Try harder, please. I'm not buying what you're selling.

[toknormal]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years

It's actually very simple.

There is a philosophy in crypto that alludes to the existence of an innate legitimising authority. Kind of like "these are the rules, if you follow them, you are legit and if you don't you're not and neither's your marketcap".

It's bogus of course - for 2 reasons in particular:

[1] - crypto is decentralised, there is no 'legitimising authority' neither explicit or implied other than the market
[2] - crypto is unbacked money

What the latter point means is that the tokens are worth exactly zip when they are created. Nor are they regulated, nor is there any “ethical dimension” to their creation (Unless people want to read their own ethical dimensions into it in which there'll be as many 'ethical dimensions' as observers).

They are simply tokens that only have any value if the market says they have.

The emission rate, who got how much, whether the dev changed the properties after launch doesn't matter SQUAT other than they are just another bunch of things to be priced in amongst everything else.

Just as we’ve seen in this thread, they matter to more to some buyers and less to others (and for some still, they are an out and out religion).

I didn't buy Dash because of a "fair launch". I couldn't care less about whether a coin had a fair launch or not unless I think it's going to affect its future value. For two years the same few conflicted trolls on bitcointalk have been attempting to convince me otherwise and for 2 years they've been proved wrong so I'm not exactly losing sleep over it.

Markets always sort these things out because, unlike conflicted bitcointalk pseudo-religious crypto nutcase zealots, they take everything into account and price everything in.

There is no black and white. No "legit" or "not legit". It is what it is and gets priced appropriately.

[smooth]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years.

Where is the "false narrative"? These are all objective factual statements:

1. Evan had at least two years of experience with crypto before launching Dash. There was no "lack of experience" as you claim. (Your statement about what "caused mistakes to be made" was opinion, by the way. I'm glad we have agreed to exclude opinion from this thread.)

2. Evan stated months ahead of the launch that he was working on a "for-profit" coin launch.

3. Evan deliberately withheld the development and feature plans until after the end of the instqamine.

4. Evan misled people about the launch schedule, launching much earlier than promised. During the first hour, over 500000 coins were mined, and in 8 hours, over a million coins.

5. Evan later cut the mining rewards and coin supply, increasing the effective size of the instamine by a factor of four or more.

6. In total, the instamine of 2 million coins represents over 30% of the current supply of Dash.

7. "Official Communication" from Dash blaming the instamine on inherited Litecoin code (which is factually false).

8. Dash ANN OP claiming the coin was "fairly and transparently launched".

If there is any "false narrative" here, it is the claims like "fairly and transparently launched" which are being made by Dash.

BTW, "a lot of coins were mined in the first 48 hours" is misleading spin. A lot of coins were mined within one one hour of the early launch, and then in the first 6-8 hours. The rest of the 48 hours was just icing on the cake.

Smooth, I thought you were better than this. Don't make me post a link to the Allen Iverson video again! Some facts, some spin.

1. Fact
2. Fact
3. Conjecture (Not Fact)
4. Conjecture (The launch time was posted)
5. Fact
6. Fact
7. There is a basis for saying that
8. Conjecture

Some facts and some conjecture. Try harder, please. I'm not buying what you're selling.

You are incorrect. Every single statement I made is factual and objective.

Anything conjectural about it, you are basing on your own interpretation of what I wrote.

With respect to #7 specifically, it is false to state that the Litecoin difficulty adjustment was responsible for the production of extra coins, because that was responsible only for a small portion of the extra coins. The vast majority of the coins came from block rewards that were stuck at the maximum value due to another bug, one that was not related to Litecoin, and which would have happened regardless of the rate of difficulty adjustments.

The Official Communication also states that Evan made a patch to the code to fix the difficulty adjustment within a few hours of launch. I can find no evidence of such a patch implementing any such hard fork prior to the one that ended the instamine after day two. Unless I'm mistaken, this is another factually incorrect statement.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years

It's actually very simple.

There is a philosophy in crypto that alludes to the existence of an innate legitimising authority. Kind of like "these are the rules, if you follow them, you are legit and if you don't you're not and neither's your marketcap".

It's bogus of course - for 2 reasons in particular:

[1] - crypto is decentralised, there is no 'legitimising authority' neither explicit or implied other than the market
[2] - crypto is unbacked money

What the latter point means is that the tokens are worth exactly zip when they are created. Nor are they regulated, nor is there any “ethical dimension” to their creation (Unless people want to read their own ethical dimensions into it in which there'll be as many 'ethical dimensions' as observers).

They are simply tokens that only have any value if the market says they have.

The emission rate, who got how much, whether the dev changed the properties after launch doesn't matter SQUAT other than they are just another bunch of things to be priced in amongst everything else.

Just as we’ve seen in this thread, they matter to more to some buyers and less to others (and for some still, they are an out and out religion).

I didn't buy Dash because of a "fair launch". I couldn't care less about whether a coin had a fair launch or not unless I think it's going to affect its future value. For two years the same few conflicted trolls on bitcointalk have been attempting to convince me otherwise and for 2 years they've been proved wrong so I'm not exactly losing sleep over it.

Markets always sort these things out because, unlike conflicted bitcointalk pseudo-religious crypto nutcase zealots, they take everything into account and price everything in.

There is no black and white. No "legit" or "not legit". It is what it is and gets priced appropriately.

Tok, I'm so glad you joined us here. You are a shining example of the professionalism that Dash displays daily. As a member of Dash Nation, you are part of the inspiration for creating this thread. As you know, Dash is on to big things, with every post the school-boy bullies make it becomes clearer and clearer. I hope you stick around when the thread becomes more positive later on.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

The constant false narrative by the people who present half facts half spin is a big reason Dash has been held back for the last 2 years.

Where is the "false narrative"? These are all objective factual statements:

1. Evan had at least two years of experience with crypto before launching Dash. There was no "lack of experience" as you claim. (Your statement about what "caused mistakes to be made" was opinion, by the way. I'm glad we have agreed to exclude opinion from this thread.)

2. Evan stated months ahead of the launch that he was working on a "for-profit" coin launch.

3. Evan deliberately withheld the development and feature plans until after the end of the instqamine.

4. Evan misled people about the launch schedule, launching much earlier than promised. During the first hour, over 500000 coins were mined, and in 8 hours, over a million coins.

5. Evan later cut the mining rewards and coin supply, increasing the effective size of the instamine by a factor of four or more.

6. In total, the instamine of 2 million coins represents over 30% of the current supply of Dash.

7. "Official Communication" from Dash blaming the instamine on inherited Litecoin code (which is factually false).

8. Dash ANN OP claiming the coin was "fairly and transparently launched".

If there is any "false narrative" here, it is the claims like "fairly and transparently launched" which are being made by Dash.

BTW, "a lot of coins were mined in the first 48 hours" is misleading spin. A lot of coins were mined within one one hour of the early launch, and then in the first 6-8 hours. The rest of the 48 hours was just icing on the cake.

Smooth, I thought you were better than this. Don't make me post a link to the Allen Iverson video again! Some facts, some spin.

1. Fact
2. Fact
3. Conjecture (Not Fact)
4. Conjecture (The launch time was posted)
5. Fact
6. Fact
7. There is a basis for saying that
8. Conjecture

Some facts and some conjecture. Try harder, please. I'm not buying what you're selling.

You are incorrect. Every single statement I made is factual and objective.

Anything conjectural about it, you are basing on your own interpretation of what I wrote.

With respect to #7 specifically, it is false to state that the Litecoin difficulty adjustment was responsible for the production of extra coins, because that was responsible only for a small portion of the extra coins. The vast majority of the coins came from block rewards that were stuck at the maximum value due to another bug, one that was not related to Litecoin, and which would have happened regardless of the rate of difficulty adjustments.

The Official Communication also states that Evan made a patch to the code to fix the difficulty adjustment within a few hours of launch. I can find no evidence of such a patch implementing any such hard fork prior to the one that ended the instamine after day two. Unless I'm mistaken, this is another factually incorrect statement.

Lord, give me strength. There is nothing in any post I've seen from any of you guys that can prove that a) Evan mined all the coins, and b) That he knowingly perpetrated a scam.

Prove either one of those things, and you have your smoking gun. I will not address this subject with you again. Your time for controlling the Dash discussion is at an end.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

Why does Dash have what it takes to become the Internet of Money?

 https://www.rebelmouse.com/dashnation/the-internet-1715527827.html

[stan.distortion]

...
You are incorrect. Every single statement I made is factual and objective.

Anything conjectural about it, you are basing on your own interpretation of what I wrote.

With respect to #7 specifically, it is false to state that the Litecoin difficulty adjustment was responsible for the production of extra coins, because that was responsible only for a small portion of the extra coins. The vast majority of the coins came from block rewards that were stuck at the maximum value due to another bug, one that was not related to Litecoin, and which would have happened regardless of the rate of difficulty adjustments.

The Official Communication also states that Evan made a patch to the code to fix the difficulty adjustment within a few hours of launch. I can find no evidence of such a patch implementing any such hard fork prior to the one that ended the instamine after day two. Unless I'm mistaken, this is another factually incorrect statement.

They're also old news, practically pre-historic in the timeline of crypto and only a very small number of posters seem to give a damn, posters who bring up the first 48 hours of Dashes history time and time and time again, they're up to about 10 pages of posts on that single point over the last day or so and I've yet to see a concerned comment from any established poster outside that small group. Trolling, spam and a side order of off-topic.

Dashes launch is no secret and if anyone is genuinely concerned there have been many detailed articles on it thanks to the constant repetition of those same few points by these same few trolls but you won't find those trolls uttering a single true word on the present state of Dash and what kind of shape it's in for the future, they're shit scared of that subject and will put a great deal of effort into disrupting it. Some stay stuck in the same rut indefinitely, Dash evolves.

[smooth]

...
You are incorrect. Every single statement I made is factual and objective.

Anything conjectural about it, you are basing on your own interpretation of what I wrote.

With respect to #7 specifically, it is false to state that the Litecoin difficulty adjustment was responsible for the production of extra coins, because that was responsible only for a small portion of the extra coins. The vast majority of the coins came from block rewards that were stuck at the maximum value due to another bug, one that was not related to Litecoin, and which would have happened regardless of the rate of difficulty adjustments.

The Official Communication also states that Evan made a patch to the code to fix the difficulty adjustment within a few hours of launch. I can find no evidence of such a patch implementing any such hard fork prior to the one that ended the instamine after day two. Unless I'm mistaken, this is another factually incorrect statement.

They're also old news, practically pre-historic in the timeline of crypto and only a very small number of posters seem to give a damn

That does jive with the fact that the edits to the Dash OP in terms of how to characterize the launch are relatively recent and the "Official Communication" document is from three months ago.

The people running the Dash project damn well know that investors and other market participants do care about this stuff, or they wouldn't still be trying to spin it in 2016.

Calling it old news and pre-historic is a nice attempt to brush aside the issues, but the actions of your own project betray you.

Dashes launch is no secret and if anyone is genuinely concerned there have been many detailed articles

Unfortunately many of those detailed articles, when put out by Dash and/or Dash supporters, end up being grossly inaccurate and deceptive, and therefore represent an ongoing attempt to mislead and scam investors, as I documented above.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

In order to become the Internet of Money, Dash will have to get out from under Bitcoin's shadow when it comes to exchanges. What is the short-term plan?

https://www.rebelmouse.com/dashnation/ditching-btc-1695039752.html

[smooth]

Lord, give me strength. There is nothing in any post I've seen from any of you guys that can prove that a) Evan mined all the coins, and b) That he knowingly perpetrated a scam.

Prove either one of those things, and you have your smoking gun. I will not address this subject with you again. Your time for controlling the Dash discussion is at an end.

Please review #1-7:

1. Evan had at least two years of experience with crypto before launching Dash. There was no "lack of experience" as you claim. (Your statement about what "caused mistakes to be made" was opinion, by the way. I'm glad we have agreed to exclude opinion from this thread.)

2. Evan stated months ahead of the launch that he was working on a "for-profit" coin launch.

3. Evan deliberately withheld the development and feature plans until after the end of the instqamine.

4. Evan misled people about the launch schedule, launching much earlier than promised. During the first hour, over 500000 coins were mined, and in 8 hours, over a million coins.

5. Evan later cut the mining rewards and coin supply, increasing the effective size of the instamine by a factor of four or more.

6. In total, the instamine of 2 million coins represents over 30% of the current supply of Dash.

7. "Official Communication" from Dash blaming the instamine on inherited Litecoin code (which is factually false).

8. Dash ANN OP claiming the coin was "fairly and transparently launched".

Those are all factual. The reader can draw his or her own conclusion from these objective facts.

[stan.distortion]

Still stuck in the past Smooth? No worries, when you start looking to the future Dash will still be there and overflowing with innovation as always.

[CryptoAddict]

Welcome to our thread. Perhaps you can provide some evidence to back up your claims? I'm giving everyone ample opportunity. Dash Nation is about fairness in governance and decentralized technology. I will extend this fairness to you. If you have evidence, bring it forward. Until then, thank you for the thread bumps.

Thanks.

My claims? I just asked questions, which you so neatly avoided.

I can repeat and expand: 1) Are you that gullible that you believe what a guy confronted with his back against the wall says? Do you realize it's the ONLY thing he can say? There is only the question of: was it intentional, or was it accidental. If he sais it was intentional his whole empire goes down. So yeah, he can pretty much only lie.

I wonder. Have you ever asked Evan for EVIDENCE??

2) Why are you trying to make the instamine a smaller issue because it was "2 years ago and only during the first 48 hours of DASH".
LoL! The most critical period in human life is the birth. It's VERY important that it go well and without complications.

DASH should have done the only right thing. Re-launch completely after "fixing the issues"

I admire your persistence. Can you provide a "smoking gun" linking Evan to any bad intent? A phone message, a video, anything?

People have laid out several issues and concerns. There is no direct "smoking gun" (afaik) evidence, but rather many smaller events that together paint a clear picture to the astute observer.

A few:

Remember that poll Evan made concering if they should "AirDrop" free coins to make up for the instamine?
Do you REALLY think anyone would base such an important decision on random voters from Bitcointalk?  What if those voters are monero shills that only want to hurt DASH? See my point? Nobody lets anonymous public decide such important decision. It's all just acting and theater to fool gullible people as yourself.

Why would Evan lower the block reward that dramatically unless he knew that he himself holds the majority of the mined coins. Do you really think he would give some random lucky miner that much power? Why would he?

Man I could go on and on. But talking to you doesn't feel very meaningful, you avoid subjects and seem to see everything through rose-colored glasses.

[meme magic]

I've seen some bullshit posted before, but I'm pretty sure Monero didn't even exist when Evan offered his airdrop idea.

add: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/04/prweb11781530.htm   -- here, 4 days after Monero launched, it was already mentioned that only 22 million drks would exist, right around the time the airdrop idea was talked about.

[stan.distortion]

If you could hold a fair vote on Evans situation you'd almost certainly find, A: No one gives a damn (this was already done btw) and B: the majority would be happy if it turned out Evan had a bloody great stash of coins.

The trolls drag up the past over and over and avoid the present at all costs, anyone who's been following Dash knows just how much work the core team put in and their track record of over-delivering, personally I hope they all get to be billionares because the system they're creating is incredible and just keeps getting better.

[toknormal]

but the actions of your own project betray you

As it happens, the actions of buthurt players in this 'game' who attempt to stuff their faux ethics and skewed priorities down everyone else's throats whenever the market moves against them...also betray them.

As far as Evan's actions go, all that's betrayed over the last 2 years is hard work and dedication to his investors.

As I said in another thread, I think some humility might be in order. (Though I won't hold my breath).

[obit33]

personally I hope they all get to be billionares because the system they're creating is incredible and just keeps getting better.

Yeah, I hope it together with you, cuz right now it seems as if what should be basic functionality in this incredible system doesn't even work:
http://blog.makemoneywhileyouwork.com/2016/01/11/using-alt-coins-to-mix-bitcoins/

nice GUI though!!!!

[stan.distortion]

personally I hope they all get to be billionares because the system they're creating is incredible and just keeps getting better.

Yeah, I hope it together with you, cuz right now it seems as if what should be basic functionality in this incredible system doesn't even work:
http://blog.makemoneywhileyouwork.com/2016/01/11/using-alt-coins-to-mix-bitcoins/

nice GUI though!!!!

OMFG, valid criticism!!! Gona frame this one Seriously though, that is a genuine problem and one that's being addressed, 0.12.1 will be out in about 2 to 3 months and it will be fixed in that.

The background to it, it's a re-implementation of coinjoin using fixed denominations to null some tracking issues with coinjoin but any implementation needs high participation to work well. Its still in active development and participation was supported by the budget for a while to get some real world stats, during that time anonymisation worked well while but it came to an end last month. As far as I know the next version anonymises by default so it will be very fast but it won't be instant (and never claimed to be), funds will still need anonymising beforehand but it should take seconds rather than hours. The new version is renamed to PrivacyProtect btw, I liked the old name better but it's what it does that matters.

[obit33]

personally I hope they all get to be billionares because the system they're creating is incredible and just keeps getting better.

Yeah, I hope it together with you, cuz right now it seems as if what should be basic functionality in this incredible system doesn't even work:
http://blog.makemoneywhileyouwork.com/2016/01/11/using-alt-coins-to-mix-bitcoins/

nice GUI though!!!!

OMFG, valid criticism!!! Gona frame this one Seriously though, that is a genuine problem and one that's being addressed, 0.12.1 will be out in about 2 to 3 months and it will be fixed in that.

Thx! By then i hope monero has a functional GUI too