I personally don't understand why James is even concerned about that coin. Let them do whatever they want, let them do DEX. Most people here understand where that premine will go from the non-greedy devs who still have no lambo. Just don't waist your time on that nonsense.
When I am personally attacked, I take it personally. But you are right, SAFE is not anything I should be wasting time on.
However, the policy on how KMD will deal with forks is something I feel I should at least have some ideas on. Until there was the first fork, it was not anything real so was hard to get tangible policy.
The danger of allowing incomplete forks to pretend they are complete is that when they fail, it will reflect badly on KMD. As such, if a fork is not technically worthy, I feel it is our duty to demonstrate this in a non-harmful way. I do not consider the loss of $1000 of mining revenue as any material harm and that is my estimate for the delayed blocks due to the diff increase. All this whining and screaming and personal attacks are from about $1000 of lost revenues, or more like delayed revenues. If the miners just stopped mining when the diff goes too high, the losses would be in the hundreds of dollars, but I will assume that they were not so good at cost management.
The security of the chain must come first, so if there are known vulnerabilities a tough love approach will be used. Anybody is free to fork KMD and ask for advice on how best to do this, we received no such requests from SAFE, who brazenly makes a plain copy paste and releases a broken clone. As soon as I found out it was broken, I advised them on how to fix it. So far this advice is mostly ignored and the SAFE chain is still unsafe.
Also, what is disturbing is their community's total lack of hesitation to rollback the chain. For 60,000 SAFE as compared to the 4 million premine, they almost unanimously voted to rollback the chain and even now I hear they are working to take away the properly notary mined coins. I dont know about you, but to not be willing to allow the creator of the coin that was forked to retain 1% of the coins for finding a big flaw, while letting the copy paster keep 4 million in the premine and millions more in stealth mined coins, just seems quite hyprocritical. It seems that all the SAFE community cares about is mining coins for cheap to not let anybody else get any coins, even if done according to the coin's consensus rules. Of course each coin is free to do what it wants, but if they are acting this way, I feel it should be pointed out that there is no value placed on the security of coins, no any sense of owing the parent coin anything at all.
So, in the case of such reactions and motivations, then I dont feel there is any obligation on our part to be any nicer than we have to be. An honest fork would deserve to have more niceness in its treatment. The more honest the fork is, the better the treatment. Basically it would be best to not disregard your heritage and to actually hold up crypto principles, instead of just being a pure money grab.
Now, regardless of how it is done, the idea is to determine if a fork is worthy of being able to call itself a KMD fork. It must be a complete fork of KMD if it is advertising itself as that. And if it saying it has made improvements to KMD, then that also must be demonstrated. So we will post a report card on the status as we find out about these forks. It might not be updated in a realtime fashion as you have said we have more important things to do, and the burden is on the fork to prove themselves.
SAFE:
Not a full KMD fork, so far just a cut and paste with name change "komodo" -> "safecoin"
No support for notaries
No notarizations
No protection from dPoW on BTC or any other chain. It is only protected by the very small mining done by the current miners.
Severe vulnerabilities to hashrate manipulation, coins emissions, compounded interest attack that have all been fixed in KMD long time ago.
A full code review has not been made and this fork was done without any consultation with us so there could be other implementation problems created in the name change process along with whatever other changes were made.
4 million premine and fast mining of 128 coins per block all for 36 million total cap, no hesitation to rollback the chain over 60,000 notary mined coins.
From what I have seen the changes made to fix the hashrate issues will be ineffective and does not address the real security issues that they have already been notified about. I guess it is more important to prevent any notary mined coins from being used than to actually fix the coin. Until SAFE is an actual KMD fork and safe from the known attack vectors, we reserve the right to field test the new versions against the claimed fixes. It just isnt responsible to release known vulnerable code. However any coins gained from such activities will be set aside for the future development of that fork and it wont be sold off on the open market.
Now all that being said, I do have to say that safecoin has done what no other clone coin dev has done and created a half-fork of KMD. If KMD was an ordinary coin, it would have been a perfectly fine cut and paste job. The coin ports were changed, all the usual required changes were made. So there is hope that safecoin can make SAFE into a complete fork, but this is not yet proven. And whether SAFE can create any direct benefit for KMD with upstream pull requests...
To the SAFE community, this might all feel like harsh treatment and I do admit it is on the harsh side, but you did it to yourself with your behavior and constant personal attacks against me. I care about the long term values, not today's mining revenues.
