Bottlecaps 2.1 UPDATE REQUIRED - HARDFORK JULY 4 2014 to 200% Annual PoS

[Tranz]

I think everyone has to make up his own mind about this unfortunate discussion. But please, let's leave it there. This is the cap-thread and I suggest that's what we talk about. Bottlecaps. If you think they are crap, then I respectfully disagree but it's everyone's own call. Me, I am just looking forward to the 2,3 version Tranz is working on and in the mean time I am having a stake-party:)

Speaking of which I think things are pretty stable right now in Hobo land, so I will be beginning some development here this week.  I'll post some of the relevant code changes as they are done, so people can be free to test them out or comment.

[ElTomeko27]

I think everyone has to make up his own mind about this unfortunate discussion. But please, let's leave it there. This is the cap-thread and I suggest that's what we talk about. Bottlecaps. If you think they are crap, then I respectfully disagree but it's everyone's own call. Me, I am just looking forward to the 2,3 version Tranz is working on and in the mean time I am having a stake-party:)

Speaking of which I think things are pretty stable right now in Hobo land, so I will be beginning some development here this week.  I'll post some of the relevant code changes as they are done, so people can be free to test them out or comment.

Tranz any chance to add coin control to CAPs??

[Palmdetroit]

I think everyone has to make up his own mind about this unfortunate discussion. But please, let's leave it there. This is the cap-thread and I suggest that's what we talk about. Bottlecaps. If you think they are crap, then I respectfully disagree but it's everyone's own call. Me, I am just looking forward to the 2,3 version Tranz is working on and in the mean time I am having a stake-party:)

Speaking of which I think things are pretty stable right now in Hobo land, so I will be beginning some development here this week.  I'll post some of the relevant code changes as they are done, so people can be free to test them out or comment.

Tranz any chance to add coin control to CAPs??

Was added months ago, check settings.

Also for whoever might do themes, noticed a fallout app (google fallout app) and look at images for some great ideas.

[ElTomeko27]

I think everyone has to make up his own mind about this unfortunate discussion. But please, let's leave it there. This is the cap-thread and I suggest that's what we talk about. Bottlecaps. If you think they are crap, then I respectfully disagree but it's everyone's own call. Me, I am just looking forward to the 2,3 version Tranz is working on and in the mean time I am having a stake-party:)

Speaking of which I think things are pretty stable right now in Hobo land, so I will be beginning some development here this week.  I'll post some of the relevant code changes as they are done, so people can be free to test them out or comment.

Tranz any chance to add coin control to CAPs??

Was added months ago, check settings.

Right, now I see.! Bless You Palmdetroit

[vegasguy]

I see on the op it says "200% yearly degrading stake, with 1000 coin max reward". What is the largest block size to get that 1000 cap reward.. is it 10,000 coin block, is that right?

Also I tried the pools on the op , and the only live 2 pools are:

https://www.multipool.us
http://cap.coinmine.pl

Any others?


Vegas

[PressF1]

I see on the op it says "200% yearly degrading stake, with 1000 coin max reward". What is the largest block size to get that 1000 cap reward.. is it 10,000 coin block, is that right?

This is the way to calculate it: 200% yearly and maturity age of 15 days means: 200%/(365/15) = 8,2% stake at 15 days.

So if your block is 10K your stake would be 820, just below max. So I'd say you're exactly right stating 10K block is maximum block size because blocks never stake right away as soon as they reach maturity. Let's say you stake 1 day after maturity, so day 16, the percentage at that point will be 8,2% * 16/15 = 8,7% = 870 coins which is still below the 1000 coins maximum.

Happy staking!

[silvermetal]

Lol, See what happens here;

Digitalindustry and family working at full steam posting nonsense messages, to bury a sensitive post about CAP from coinmama.

The post of coinmama reminds me on an e-mail conversation between Digitalindustry and Adam (aka Shake, the coincreator of CAP).
The Quark foundation discussed which coins should be listed at QEX.la (A Quark exchange, which doesn't exist anymore I think).
Adam (Shake) was in that time together with MAX the developers of Quark (and therefore a member of the foundation).
Digitalindustry suggested to include CAP. In that time I didn't know what CAP was, therefore I ignored the discussion and focussed more how to launch QEX.

Now I know something more about CAP, I think the following discussion might be relevant to post where it belongs; in the CAP thread.
In this way future investors (I doubt whether they will ever come) know the complete story about CAP:

re Qex read this last page here - i have my finger on the pulse of whats happening re spam crypto world - Caps are crying out for another exchange its up about 100% with a lot of work done https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=241445.2140

Bottlecaps are literally the definition of Cryptsy in house scam coin.

Oh, thanks for the heads up on that Adam :/

Vic

Note: Victor was in June 2014 considered as the leader of the Quark Foundation

Yea, no problem, I made them (hahah) for Bitjohn to make a few bucks--guess what, they never paid me anything for them either, and Kopimi was there from the get go, so I'd think he may hold a few of them. If we're looking for "clean" coins that with no ill backstory, CAPs are NOT them...

note: kopimi = Kolin Evans = digitalindustry (Kolin once started kopimicoin, maybe Adam refers to that?)

yeah i know Adam - he didn't even change the name ha ha  "John edan" ha ha

Note: DI refers to the OP of this CAP thread (JohnEden).

I think its nowhere else because BitJohn and Mullick are the biggest
holders lol...I agree on that though, QEX shouldn't go down the road
of scamcoin central ala cryptsy/cryptorush/coinex/etc but I understand
they are in it to make the $$ so eh.

Caps technically may be "owned" by the cryptsy crowed but its start was clean anyone and everyone had a chance to mine from dot - it was abandoned then Tranz took it over, so for all intents it is "clean" people are trying to get away from Cryptsy right now, if Qex can fill a bit of that void they win i think.

Why not send me some CAPs? Maybe having some would change my perspective ;-) Hahaha

I never held from the start i sold off , i only purchased some when i saw the takeover happening , i observed what happened with HBN and the "tokyogetto" gimmick they they have going so when Tranz started working on it i purchased some i'm no large holder but a % gain is a gain?

So there are a few open questions I guess about CAP:
- Who is "Johneden". Is that BitJohn? If yes, why did BitJohn create a new account to announce CAP? And why posts BitJohn with two different accounts in the CAP thread?
- Why is nowhere mentioned that Adam is the original creator of CAP?
- Why is Adam not paid for the creation of CAP?
- What is the relationship between Digitalindustry and Cryptsy? Why do members of the digitalindustry family (like Hilux74) use the cryptsy logo?


Also what is wrong with the developers of different coins? With Quark the same thing; when critical comments were placed  by the community about Quark, Max (the developer of Quark) ignored the comments or just disappeared. Where are they afraid of?

[Hilux74]

Also for whoever might do themes, noticed a fallout app (google fallout app) and look at images for some great ideas.

I like I like 

[PressF1]

Lol, See what happens here;

Digitalindustry and family working at full steam posting nonsense messages

Thanks for qualifying my post as nonsense

[silvermetal]

Lol, See what happens here;

Digitalindustry and family working at full steam posting nonsense messages

Thanks for qualifying my post as nonsense

No, No, I have to thank YOU for stepping forward and indicate who YOU are.
To make it more specific; Are you Digitalindustry or somebody from his family?

EDIT: See PressF1's reaction below. If PressF1 wants to discuss and talk about CAP why doesn't he quote one of my open questions I posted (or even better: answer some!)?
But no, he only quotes the part of (the) digitalindustry (family)....

[PressF1]

Lol, See what happens here;

Digitalindustry and family working at full steam posting nonsense messages

Thanks for qualifying my post as nonsense

Thank you for indicating who you are.
To make it more specific; Are you Digitalindustry or somebody from his family?

You seem to think a lot of people are. I feel offended by it. I am just me and read my history if you are really interested in what i have to say about caps.

which brings me at another thing i mentioned before. I don't know why you are so mad at DI but please take it elsewhere. This is the cap thread. Thank you.

[kiklo]

which brings me at another thing i mentioned before. I don't know why you are so mad at DI but please take it elsewhere. This is the cap thread. Thank you.

+1

 

[eBit]

I think everyone has to make up his own mind about this unfortunate discussion. But please, let's leave it there. This is the cap-thread and I suggest that's what we talk about. Bottlecaps. If you think they are crap, then I respectfully disagree but it's everyone's own call. Me, I am just looking forward to the 2,3 version Tranz is working on and in the mean time I am having a stake-party:)

Speaking of which I think things are pretty stable right now in Hobo land, so I will be beginning some development here this week.  I'll post some of the relevant code changes as they are done, so people can be free to test them out or comment.

Tranz any chance to add coin control to CAPs??

Coin control was added some time ago.  It's in v2.1.0.0 and later.  Go to Settings > Options > Display, then check 'Display Coin Control Features.'  Save your changes, then click on the 'Send Coins' tab.  The 'Coin Control' button will be visible.

[Tranz]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

[digitalindustry]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

this is great .

Great work Tranz.

[PressF1]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

Looking good!

Question: Did you by any chance tweaked the priority issue I encountered with HBN? When using autosave or S4C, I discovered it's not 100% certain one of the 2 new blocks are used to sent the stake% from which resulted in loss of maturity.

I gave it some thought and it thought it would be solved when priority would always be 'lowest' for a block with less than let's say 50 confirmations. Or even better an added category 'none' for this condition. Don't know what's easiest to code.

[Tranz]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

Looking good!

Question: Did you by any chance tweaked the priority issue I encountered with HBN? When using autosave or S4C, I discovered it's not 100% certain one of the 2 new blocks are used to sent the stake% from which resulted in loss of maturity.

I gave it some thought and it thought it would be solved when priority would always be 'lowest' for a block with less than let's say 50 confirmations. Or even better an added category 'none' for this condition. Don't know what's easiest to code.

I have thought about what you have said. But for now I am not going to play too much with that part of S4C. It seems to work perfectly 90%+ of the time.

Also I was thinking about a  situation where you may not want it to use the newest block. As you may just combined or received a big block that you do not want to get used. 

I do have plans to look at this deeper, but most likely will not be until I make the change to allow for more then one S4C per wallet.  That is a bit down the road.

[PressF1]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

Looking good!

Question: Did you by any chance tweaked the priority issue I encountered with HBN? When using autosave or S4C, I discovered it's not 100% certain one of the 2 new blocks are used to sent the stake% from which resulted in loss of maturity.

I gave it some thought and it thought it would be solved when priority would always be 'lowest' for a block with less than let's say 50 confirmations. Or even better an added category 'none' for this condition. Don't know what's easiest to code.

I have thought about what you have said. But for now I am not going to play too much with that part of S4C. It seems to work perfectly 90%+ of the time.

Also I was thinking about a  situation where you may not want it to use the newest block. As you may just combined or received a big block that you do not want to get used. 

I do have plans to look at this deeper, but most likely will not be until I make the change to allow for more then one S4C per wallet.  That is a bit down the road.

It occurred with too big blocks anyway and with smaller blocks I don't expect too much trouble indeed. Nice to know that in the future more than one S4C will be possible. Will come in handy! 

[Tranz]

Updated Auto Savings Tab.

https://github.com/Tranz5/bottlecaps/commit/c4c84f12bcae38c799f3ebd4b0ffd6523acfb1c2

Added Change Address to gui and rpc.
Updated the Auto Savings GUI tab.
If the max amount is set, it will truncate the ATS if it is over
Added Code to prevent double sending
And finally Saved all settings to wallet.dat so they will persist after restart.

Looking good!

Question: Did you by any chance tweaked the priority issue I encountered with HBN? When using autosave or S4C, I discovered it's not 100% certain one of the 2 new blocks are used to sent the stake% from which resulted in loss of maturity.

I gave it some thought and it thought it would be solved when priority would always be 'lowest' for a block with less than let's say 50 confirmations. Or even better an added category 'none' for this condition. Don't know what's easiest to code.

I have thought about what you have said. But for now I am not going to play too much with that part of S4C. It seems to work perfectly 90%+ of the time.

Also I was thinking about a  situation where you may not want it to use the newest block. As you may just combined or received a big block that you do not want to get used. 

I do have plans to look at this deeper, but most likely will not be until I make the change to allow for more then one S4C per wallet.  That is a bit down the road.

It occurred with too big blocks anyway and with smaller blocks I don't expect too much trouble indeed. Nice to know that in the future more than one S4C will be possible. Will come in handy! 

Hmmm ok. Do you happen to have one of the transaction IDs available?

[PressF1]

Hmmm ok. Do you happen to have one of the transaction IDs available?

With the transaction was no problem. At the time I only had blocks of the highest priority. The block that staked was so big that the two new blocks with only 25 confirmations already had the highest priority too. Since I had an older block that was smaller than the ones just produced, that one was used for the S4C.

So I stopped using S4C for a while to let them all split a couple of times. I think they are small enough now to have sufficient low priority to be chosen first. I just started S4C again and today I expect 3 blocks to stake. I'll let you know if they work out fine. Thanks for asking though!

EDIT: I stopped staking due to rise in diff. (it's about hbn) If I encounter anomaly's I'll post it.