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

[ISAWHIM]

Just a note...

The wallet seems to be getting real slow and clunky the more transactions I get. I am moving the coins to a fresh wallet, but it is ignoring my "-mintxrelayfee=0.00000001 -mintxfee=0.00000001" settings, still trying to charge me 0.01 to send 500 coins (Which is hundreds of "stake coin rewards" of 0.01, mixed with actual 10 coin earnings.

The wallet keeps "not responding", in attempts to send (on the send tx page), when canceled... since I cancel, because it is trying to charge me an unacceptable price (one I didn't set), to the transaction. Charges that only exist, due to the "programs operation, creating dust-coins", not charges that exist because "I created dust-coins".

(Eg, the whole dust transaction fee should not exist for "system created dust", which is unavoidable and beyond the users control. We don't tell it to create dust, it just does it by itself. As opposed to us sending a tx of 0.001 thousands of times. Which should be charged a reasonable fee of 0.001% for those small transactions of man-made dust.)

Also, takes about ten minutes to open the wallet, since it is still doing that "check-wallet" (hard coded), every time it opens. Not to mention it consumes over 117,000 KB in memory. (As much as 3x a web-browser when it has many tabs open.)

[1713487033]

1713487033

[1713487033]

1713487033

[ISAWHIM]

Also note...

The "Confirm transaction fee" warning still says...
"This transaction is over the size limit. You can still send it for a fee of ____ CAP, which goes to the nodes that process your transaction and helps to support the network. Do you want to pay the fee?"

However, it DOES NOT go "to the nodes that process your transactions", it DOES "get destroyed", as you stated earlier. (False advertisement of operation of the services. But that should simply be fixed to state the following. "..., which will be removed from circulation, to stimulate and maintain coin value.")

Also note... "over the size limit"... What limit? Size of what? Where does it show the "transaction size". Why is is not sending my large transaction and one small transaction? Why does it seem to collect and send the dust, making it "over the size limit", beyond our control.

Besides, sending 1000 micro-transactions which turn into ONE lump transaction, should not be taxed. You already taxed the prior sender, who sent me the dust. Oh wait, you didn't, because the dust is the dust YOU created by the POS coins of 0.01 and mined coins of 10, which the system created, which now costs me 0.01 - 0.04 to send. That is ass-backwards. We should be rewarded for turning those 1000 micro transactions into one large TX of 500 coins, since "this does not go to the nodes processing the TX's".

Tax the poor! lol

Sorry, just venting again.

Would be nice to see what "would not be a TX over the size limit", so we can just send those, then re-send them again, into a consolidated TX. (Oh wait, that would create more TX's which would slow down the network and fatten the chain, as opposed to the ones that consolidate thousands into one.)

I am sure that theory sounded good on paper, or in someones head... but in reality, the practice of hidden uncontrollable charges for things we didn't do, is just poor service. But that is my complaint with most coins.

Since there is no "processing fee/reward", it won't be worth running the computer, processing transactions, for the low POS return, which we can't adjust. (Well, we can, by merging all the dust into large tx's of 500 coins, provided we have enough coins for profit of processing all the networks incoming tx's.)

Would be better, in the long-run, to have less POS rewards, and have them consolidated into "whole coins, or more", before creating that return-coin TX. (The mined POS coin).

Eg, taking 200 total as 20 of 10, not 20 as 2 of 10... then rewarding the POS after ten blocks as 1 coin, as opposed to 0.01 - 0.003 after 20. (Thus, reward the POS as the single lump of 200.1 to 200.03) This would make the network constantly "reduce the dust, free of charge".

P.S. I am up to being charged 0.048 now, sending only 500 coins at a time, to myself. How high is this going to go when I am down to 3000 TX's of 0.001 - 0.01? All the POS rewards from my mined coins.

I like that... send 1000, it asks for 0.03, which I canceled... sent it as 500 and 500 instead, it took 0.01 and 0.01... How does that work? That would have been 0.02 to send the 1000... This is so random and inconsistent for fees.

[mullick]

Ok what we need is a coin control wallet.

Ill work on that and re phrase a few things in the wallet to the correct statements. Ill have it done in a few days

Buy caps!

EDIT: A few people had suggested a name change. Thinking Bottlecaps and/or caps implies disposable or "cheap"

What does everyone think of this? Is a name change in order?  If so ill do a poll

[GoldBit89]

Ok what we need is a coin control wallet.

Ill work on that and re phrase a few things in the wallet to the correct statements. Ill have it done in a few days

Buy caps!

EDIT: A few people had suggested a name change. Thinking Bottlecaps and/or caps implies disposable or "cheap"

What does everyone think of this? Is a name change in order?  If so ill do a poll

regarding the name change:

i say keep as it is.

if something drastic happened to the world tomorrow, and money was not able to be printed, no internet and no cell phone usage,paper money and metal coins would be just like in "Fallout" and "Wasteland".Trading and barter would quickly become the norm.Bitcoins separates away from fiat as should bottlecaps separates from bitcoin in its uniqueness and why it was created in the first place.

Cheap and disposable is determined by the eyes of the beholder, yeah if your a billionaire , yeah bottlecaps may be cheap and disposable, but if you are not utter rich, bottlecaps may just be the right fit.

[ISAWHIM]

Personally, I like "Bottle Caps".

However, if you are going for a more serious name, (Moving away from caps, by rebranding), I suggest the following...

CAP (Keeping the trade symbol)
- Capricoin (Because I am a capricorn. 10th sign in zodiac. Ram with fish tail. Earth-sign, ruled by Saturn.
- Coin App (Removing identification and hijacking commonly searched terms)
- Check App (Implying these are like a form of bank-check)
- Coin Amp (Suggesting that it amplifies... "grows")
- Capital Pay Coin
- Capital Coin
- Currency App Coin


If the CAP isn't important...

Aero Coin (It's in the cloud. It's streamlined.)
Net Coin (Implying internet or "net gain")
Trade Coin (Implying trade-investments and/or trade-job)
Digital Check (Blunt) or Digi-check or e-check

Just filling space now.. lol.

Ok, back to my corner.

I think the slow start-up should be fixed before anything. That might be why people are not using it. Takes too long just to even show on the screen. Longer just to send a transaction from a wallet full of transactions, as the chain grows. (Even the new empty wallet I unloaded all 30,000 coins to, is taking forever just to load and send. This is on the windows compiled version.)

[bholzer]

In my opinion, a name change would be beneficial. I've discussed the topic with Mullick briefly and we came to the conclusion that it's the right play.

"BottleCaps" might seem like a fine name to those familiar with "Fallout"...but to the common altcoin investor or newcomer, the name implies "low value." BottleCaps are something most people throw away on a daily basis. Bitcoin has a market cap surpassing $3 billion...the Litecoin market cap is working toward $100,000,000...and BottleCaps sounds more like something you'd find in a dump than a commodity you would mine or invest in over other options. Another issue is that BottleCaps are becoming associated with constant forking issues. Distancing the currency from past issues now that they are resolved is a plus. BottleCaps have been around long enough now that the entire market cap should be worth more than 17 Bitcoins -- let's face it: if something doesn't change, we're on a sinking ship here. Sometimes you just have to be honest with yourself.

Speaking of being honest -- I didn't start mining or buying Bottlecaps initially solely because the name implied "stay away." With all of the altcoins out there, I didn't see the point in putting energy into researching/buying/mining coins that sounded like junk such as BottleCaps, HoboNickels, Elephantcoins, BarbecueCoins, etc. Call me naive for overlooking BottleCaps based on the name...but looking back it was definitely the right play.

We're talking about peoples' hard-earned money and valuable time here; there are so many choices in the altcoin world that I absolutely believe the name is holding BottleCaps back. Once BottleCaps was perfected, I realized it may be the best PoS coin out there. Another bonus (in my opinion) is that it is managed by the Cryptsy dev team -- this also contributed to my interest.

Although the price has been steadily dropping, I do believe the current price represents a great value regardless of the name. We know the development team is for real and they're here to stay for a while -- that fact alone gives CAP an advantage many other altcoins don't have.

It's hard enough for most people to invest in digital currencies...let alone altcoins...let alone an altcoin named "BottleCaps." As somebody with a sizable percentage of minted BottleCaps, I'm telling you right now -- the name has to go.

Although I've seen a few coins roll out recently with a similar concept, I like the idea of naming it as if it's a new element. For example, "Capinium." In my opinion, it would be an advantage if the code could remain, "CAP" to soften the transition (although I don't consider this a requirement.)

Regardless of the new name, I honestly feel that a new identity, a fresh new logo, and a small marketing push, combined with this existing great community and the Cryptsy dev team, would pack a punch. A great benefit of a fair release is that new people drawn in by the re-brand can start investing in CAP without feeling like they're too late to the party. If executed properly, I think we'd see rapid growth in the network speed and market cap alike.

I'm currently tied up with a Megacoin project...but I'd be happy to offer assistance with this process where I can.

[GoldBit89]

In my opinion, a name change would be beneficial. I've discussed the topic with Mullick briefly and we came to the conclusion that it's the right play.

"BottleCaps" might seem like a fine name to those familiar with "Fallout"...but to the common altcoin investor or newcomer, the name implies "low value." BottleCaps are something most people throw away on a daily basis. Bitcoin has a market cap surpassing $3 billion...the Litecoin market cap is working toward $100,000,000...and BottleCaps sounds more like something you'd find in a dump than a commodity you would mine or invest in over other options. Another issue is that BottleCaps are becoming associated with constant forking issues. Distancing the currency from past issues now that they are resolved is a plus. BottleCaps have been around long enough now that the entire market cap should be worth more than 17 Bitcoins -- let's face it: if something doesn't change, we're on a sinking ship here. Sometimes you just have to be honest with yourself.

Is this what its really all about :investors?  Because i can not buy that newcomers will imply that bottlecaps is "low value". The term "Bitcoin" is what? Bits of coins or if you are an oldschooler 2 bits = quarter . So if its all just about the investor: i think each and every one that has some bottlecaps are investors. As we either had to mine them or had to work to purchase them which in turn does makes us investors. i do not think of them as a "low value". i do not think other holders do either.If it was just all about investors then why not just name it platinum and gold caps  then, get my drift?

[DrGoose]

Considering that CAP is likely to remain a very low "denomination" relative to bitcoin... bottlecaps seems to be an honest fit  

I am fine with dropping the bottlecap name, but I doubt it is the main problem.

Seems instead CAP is victim of its own good algo for difficulty adjustment, making it valuable to mine/dump at any price. Not the first to say it.

CAP main liquidity flow is from miners to a handful of investor waiting for the automated dump. CAP won't suddenly catch on while most investors are just doing bottom fishing.

What could be done?
  - Make it hard for automated mine/dump operation to be profitable. That would be a good differentiator among the alt coins.
  - Attract new investors with a higher POS.
  - Other idea?

[Vivisector999]

Personally I think the name Bottlecaps should stay.  It's something that makes the name special, as every other alt out there is named after something expensive with the name Coin after it, or something really stupid.  I really doubt people looking to invest will say  "wow there is Plutonium coin, selling next to Emerald Coin, Gold Coin, Diamond Coin, Titanium Coin and Ruby coin, looks like a great investment.  Bottlecaps sticks out from the long line of other names, and has some following behind it.

A name change isn't going to fix the coin.  Getting on some sales promotions, or other ways of using the coin is what will drive the price up.  Right now we have fallen off a few websites becuase of the forking problem/the problem with our Block explorers compared to other coins, and the lack of people driving to get them listed again.  We also need to work at building relations with a few of those venders (like the Steam games or sextoy sales site)  and get them to take the coins again. 

I myself am going to try to find a few more types of Card codes I can sell via my Apocalypse Pete's webstore, to get some Bottlecaps flowing.  Was thinking maybe Facebook cards, Karmacoin cards, Android cards, and a few others that I can find that will be accepted in the US, as my iTunes idea failed miserably, since they can only be used in Canada from what I have found out. 

[DrGoose]

I also do not believe a name change to be a fix.

Still, here is a proposal if people are concern with the bottle/fallout angle:

Call them "cap"

Make cap a noun instead of an abbreviation. A cap is just a new denomination. This is no different than dollar, lire, bitcoin, baht, dinar...

Just drop the bottle/fallout part from the marketing, and use a neutral logo like any other coin (I suggest to go simple with a denomination character like BTC).

This might be the path of least resistance to resolve the "low value" perception without completely throwing away what made this coin (slightly) different.

[BitcoinFX]

Considering that CAP is likely to remain a very low "denomination" relative to bitcoin... bottlecaps seems to be an honest fit  

I am fine with dropping the bottlecap name, but I doubt it is the main problem.

Seems instead CAP is victim of its own good algo for difficulty adjustment, making it valuable to mine/dump at any price. Not the first to say it.

CAP main liquidity flow is from miners to a handful of investor waiting for the automated dump. CAP won't suddenly catch on while most investors are just doing bottom fishing.

What could be done?
  - Make it hard for automated mine/dump operation to be profitable. That would be a good differentiators among the alt coins.
  - Attract new investors with a higher POS.
 - Other idea?

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/1438-thebottlebank/

Liquidity, liquidity, liquidity - CAP is great!  

I don't really like banks or centralization... but perhaps its worth a shot ? It's an 'experimental' crypto after all !

[Damnsammit]

I don't think ch anging the name is a great idea... but of course, I haven't done anything with my CAPs except hold them in a wallet that I may or may not even have access to anymore

[Hilux74]

Changing the name of the coin is not a good idea.  'Bottlecaps' is the established brand.  CAPs caught my attention not for any link to Fallout but for the interesting dichotomy of an advanced currency (that scares and confuses many average people) manifested to a simple non threatening item and has a retro appeal to the young and a nostalgic appeal to the older.  The fact many people do link it with Fallout isn't bad either...right there you have instant recognition with the entire gamer demographic.

Bottlecaps is a brand that can be developed.  The job now is to develop the brand not re-brand.

Changing the name as a method to attract investors is weak and very short sighted and essentially a hollow cheap trick.  Will you change the name every 3 months to trick foolish investors instead of simply developing the brand and attracting smart investors?

CAPs has a good technical design and good active people behind it.  Now is the time for people to put their 'thinking CAPs' on and develop some useful services (ie not gambling games) that will let this coin stand out and get noticed.

**If you do change the name 'Capinium' is the most retarded name for mass adoption I have ever heard.

[mullick]

Some personal things have come up over the last 24 hours I will be out of town for a n indefinite amount of time. Hopefully just a few days. But I should be able to accomplish the update from my laptop while away. So still should have the wallet by this weekend.

As far as the name change I see both sides. Caps future will be decided by you guys so we will discuss it more and come to a conclusion soon. But it will be left as is for now

Considering that CAP is likely to remain a very low "denomination" relative to bitcoin... bottlecaps seems to be an honest fit 

I am fine with dropping the bottlecap name, but I doubt it is the main problem.

Seems instead CAP is victim of its own good algo for difficulty adjustment, making it valuable to mine/dump at any price. Not the first to say it.

CAP main liquidity flow is from miners to a handful of investor waiting for the automated dump. CAP won't suddenly catch on while most investors are just doing bottom fishing.

What could be done?
  - Make it hard for automated mine/dump operation to be profitable. That would be a good differentiators among the alt coins.
  - Attract new investors with a higher POS.
  - Other idea?

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/1438-thebottlebank/

Liquidity, liquidity, liquidity - CAP is great! 

I don't really like banks or centralization... but perhaps its worth a shot ? It's an 'experimental' crypto after all !

Really glad to see you again. I was hoping we hadn't lost you in the previous issues we had. Glad to see you again and thanks for your support!

[ISAWHIM]

One thing to remember...

This is by my observations of trades. CAP coins are being held the longest. (Compared to crap coins, that are all sold ASAP with every BTC move.) Thus, only those few short-sellers are listing to get rid of them for the rising BTC. Funny thing is, they are devaluing the coin 10x to get the 2x gain on BTC. Thus, morons. lol.

Not to mention, this is the ONLY client I quickly get 15+ connections to.. thus, a lot of people are "POSing" the investments, not mining.

I have swiped up 48,000 coins at a steal, on cryptsy. This lowered the loss from my 27,000 I purchased when the coins were high. Now my average coin price is 0.000045 as opposed to the 0.00015 I paid for the initial 27,000 coins. Not including all that I am continually mining, to keep out of the hands of short-sellers. I keep buying every short-sale I can. (BTC I earned from trading and investing in mcxNOW and mcxFEE-shares.)

Thus, buy every short-sold coin, at your gain, and their loss. The coins will rise like mad when BTC starts to fall. However, BTC will fall only about 50% while CAPs rise back up 1000%, to the previous ground. That is a lot more BTC you can buy at that point, selling at the higher level.

Now, if I could just find a reliable source to sell me hardware or art supplies, for BTC.

Trade tip... Now that BTC is high, and CAP are low, you buy CAP with BTC, not sell. lol. When BTC drops and CAP rises, that is when you sell... Selling again when BTC rises, to buy more CAPs. Until you own everything!

Still, I am having the major issue with the client not even showing for almost five minutes, after it has started. (Doesn't show on the screen, but the icon is there, frozen.) Sending transactions seems real tedious, as it does the same slow-down. Though only takes about a minute for the (not responding) frozen program to begin working and let me know it didn't just crash, before I can send the next transaction.

Might just be a windows thing, something like compile optimized settings wrong or database bottlenecking, on a windows system.

[ISAWHIM]

Instead of retargeting after every single fast block, why not every Nth block? 1:8 and 1:10 are easy enough to calculate and wouldn't detrimentally hurt the coin by sticking someone with an uber high diff if multi or other large hoppers start jumping back into the coin.

On the note of name-change... I agree that this is an established coin, with a brand-name now. None of the users question that it is a coin, but new users don't care what the name is. They care about the "things they can use it for". Investors don't care if it is called "crap-coin", if it has potential for investment. If they do, they are poor investors.

This isn't a scam-coin or a pump-coin, that is why it doesn't get pump-scams. You don't want those guys here anyways. The biggest selling point is that this is a coin that processes fast, is reliable on delivery, has had few attacks (if any), is still actively supported by the community, and never seems to be on the bottom. (Unlike scam-coins that jump from bottom to top, over and over, with the hoppers and pumpers.)

I'll see if I can setup an "official website", since that seems to be the only other issue I can help with. I have a hard time still "searching", for "bottlecaps", or "bottlecap coins", because google keeps leading me to actual bottlecaps and coins made from bottlecaps. Having a website with good google-targeted relevance to the search will help a LOT! That is easy for me to do. Even if it just links to all the relevant forum posts and services.

Might want to see about making a hot-link in the wallet, once the site is done. Or, at-least a selectable (copy/paste) text to lead them to the "source of the coin".

[Tranz]

One thing to remember...

This is by my observations of trades. CAP coins are being held the longest. (Compared to crap coins, that are all sold ASAP with every BTC move.) Thus, only those few short-sellers are listing to get rid of them for the rising BTC. Funny thing is, they are devaluing the coin 10x to get the 2x gain on BTC. Thus, morons. lol.

Not to mention, this is the ONLY client I quickly get 15+ connections to.. thus, a lot of people are "POSing" the investments, not mining.

I have swiped up 48,000 coins at a steal, on cryptsy. This lowered the loss from my 27,000 I purchased when the coins were high. Now my average coin price is 0.000045 as opposed to the 0.00015 I paid for the initial 27,000 coins. Not including all that I am continually mining, to keep out of the hands of short-sellers. I keep buying every short-sale I can. (BTC I earned from trading and investing in mcxNOW and mcxFEE-shares.)

Thus, buy every short-sold coin, at your gain, and their loss. The coins will rise like mad when BTC starts to fall. However, BTC will fall only about 50% while CAPs rise back up 1000%, to the previous ground. That is a lot more BTC you can buy at that point, selling at the higher level.

Now, if I could just find a reliable source to sell me hardware or art supplies, for BTC.

Trade tip... Now that BTC is high, and CAP are low, you buy CAP with BTC, not sell. lol. When BTC drops and CAP rises, that is when you sell... Selling again when BTC rises, to buy more CAPs. Until you own everything!

Still, I am having the major issue with the client not even showing for almost five minutes, after it has started. (Doesn't show on the screen, but the icon is there, frozen.) Sending transactions seems real tedious, as it does the same slow-down. Though only takes about a minute for the (not responding) frozen program to begin working and let me know it didn't just crash, before I can send the next transaction.

Might just be a windows thing, something like compile optimized settings wrong or database bottlenecking, on a windows system.

Good thoughts.  It seems the sell off of Alts is slowing. I see some gaining ground over btc, well see how long that lasts, but encouraging none the less.

As far as your client, there are a few things. #1 I wouldn't mine and stake on the same wallet. They compete for the same resources, slows down both, and the gui. #2 When sending, it is slower with mined and or many small coins. As all the blocks have to be assembled before they are sent, again this is on the same thread as the gui.

I am working on these issue with HBN as well. One approach I am taking is the use of multiple wallets. You can bring off line wallets online, with the gui still running. Let them stake then take them off. It is still a WiP but the rpc commands are in place. Since HBN is forked off CAPs, it could be added fairly easily, should be an easy diff change.

Better would be to get they gui and mining on separate cores. A bit more difficult.

With HBN and MW2, I mine for a bit, till I get a few k, then load up a hold wallet, push them there. Once I get a few of those, I zap into a separate stake wallet, and leave them there for a while. Eventually I will start taking them offline into storage and only bringing them to stake, then back to the vault...

[bholzer]

On the note of name-change... I agree that this is an established coin, with a brand-name now. None of the users question that it is a coin, but new users don't care what the name is. They care about the "things they can use it for". Investors don't care if it is called "crap-coin", if it has potential for investment. If they do, they are poor investors.

Obviously I'm one of the primary people pushing for re-branding BottleCaps...but this is another example of people in this community not getting it. To say they're poor investors if they make a decision based on the name is simply naive. It's an unfortunate fact that trivial factors play a role in almost every decision people make. Taking that a step further, I'm not sure giving a name to something that implies "worthless" that costs money to get involved in is even trivial. The only people attached to the name are people that won't (or at least shouldn't) care about a refreshing re-brand. I'm not saying a new name alone will revolutionize BottleCaps...but it's an integral part of its long-term success, in my opinion.

It's easy to be stubborn or insist we don't want to attract the interest of miners and/or deeper pockets if they weren't already sold with the existing name...but you're failing to look at the situation objectively. People are starting to flood into altcoins...and I'm here to tell you that with all of the altcoins out there..."BottleCaps" doesn't sound like something I'd want to use my hand-earned money to buy or expensive electricity to mine. It's really that simple: the name is a factor, whether you like it or not. People don't have time to research every single coin out there...and if we could attract twice as many people simply with a re-branding...it seems like a no-brainer to me.

We need to face the facts here: we're approaching 200,000 blocks...we're nearly 5 months in...and the network speed and value is slowly dwindling. We're currently looking at a network speed of roughly 20 MH/s (less than I was putting into it myself just a couple months ago)...and it's not like this is an anomaly at this point -- it's becoming par for the course. There have been a number of forking issues with BottleCaps and I know a number of people that associate the name with fork issues. I think this project keeps getting better...and there is definitely a bit of muscle behind it...but it's time to get real here, guys: BottleCaps is trending in the wrong direction.

At any given time there are about 20 altcoins more profitable to mine...and despite how you guys feel about the name, I assure you not everyone thinks exactly like you do. There are too many alternatives and too many people make level 1 decisions based on the cover of the book -- we're not splitting the atom here...this is a pretty simple concept. It doesn't mean they lack intelligence or patience -- it's just how a number of first cuts are made when there are so many options out there.

In any case, it's clear there is enough resistance here that a re-brand isn't going to happen in the near future (if ever.) As much as I'd love to say I invest in altcoins strictly out of passion...the fact is that we're all here for the same reason: profit. Whether short-term, long-term, or a combination of the two...you're lying to yourselves if you believe you aren't in it for profit. Based on what I've seen over the past few weeks, both in this thread and with BottleCaps in general, my confidence in its future has been drastically reduced.

I have 80,000 CAPs remaining (roughly 4% of the existing total) -- make me offers via PM for all or a portion of my holdings (preferably in BTC, LTC, or MEC but I'll consider anything) over the next hour. After that, I'll begin dumping on Cryptsy. I realize it's a minimal amount...and I've put a lot more into it than I'll be getting back out...but it'll be one less currency for me to track and it's clear that this community is on a different page than me.
  

[ISAWHIM]

I thought that too, about the assembly of smaller coins... However...

I moved all coins to a fresh wallet, in chunks of 500. Thus, no small coins. The app still froze just opening, as it always has. Sending 500, which is one solid coin, still sends two/three (the 500 chunk, 0.01 from one of the 500, and the remaining 499.99 goes back as one new tx, with the 0.01 removed. Well, that is random too, the split is sometimes odd, like 234 and 265.99... again, random dustmaker. Which we get fined for as a tx-fee.)

Would be nice if every deposit just added to the previous volume as a new tx. That would be a one-time dust-eater. But that is another whole story that is an issue back at the root of the original coins horrible design. (Not a CAP thing, that is an all-coin thing.)

I have no choice but to mine with the same computer as the wallet. There is no fighting of resources on this computer. I have 8GB ram, with all cards running and the client, I only use 3GB at the most. The CPU is 80% idle, even when POSing. However, an option to pause POSing, for uninterrupted operation, when needed, without shutting-down the wallet or locking it up, would be nice. First though, I think the hang-ups should be looked at, and the addition of "Unlock for XXX minutes", without going into the console. Those would be my two major wishes. (Along with the text correction of the service where it mentions use of FEES being payment for those processing the transactions.)

Just add a console-box to the page when they click on the lock-icon, or a popup to unlock and select time.

Remember, you don't want to strip the "mining" ability from the client... or they can't POS mine at all. (Not that POS minting is real taxing at the diff level it is at. Which should be a little higher, so less "solutions" flood the system all at once. Being easy to solve just makes thousands of "solutions" get thrown at the network to "check". Make it a little more difficult, and only 100 get thrown at the network to check, and reduce all the waste.)

[ISAWHIM]

Sorry that you feel that way bholzer.

However, ultimately, you invested in the coin. So you just made my point, that not only did the name NOT MATTER, but even though you didn't like it, or see any interest in it, you mined/invested in it? (Because the name didn't actually matter. Bit = small, coin = cheap. See, doesn't matter. If you keep changing the name, it will matter. Looks like a hostile takeover or indecision. Also hard to find it... what is it called now? This week?)

Throw the coins on cryptsy. I'll buy them when I get the funds, or others will.

The low value is not real. There are like 20-200 coin chunks and zero sell volume. I raised the price from 0.00000989 to 0.000022 with 0.3 BTC, another 2 BTC and I could have taken it up to 0.00015 again. It is bots buying at 0.00001 and selling at 0.000011. The majority of coins are all in everyones hands, because they are not selling that low, because that isn't the value of the coin. Those who didn't care, just sold to get BTC as it rose. Like they did on every other coin. (Funny, the bots even buy other bots coins, or their own low bids, to make it look like it is falling, to get more cheaper. Then they do the opposite, to sell more for more money. Pump-bots with no actual volume are easy to destroy... lol, just buy all their low volume, like I did.)

There is more than 20Khs mining, because I have 12Khs mining myself, and I am not getting more than half the coins. There may be 20Khs on your pool of choice, or estimated by some off-value, but there is more like a constant 50Khs+ here, at this diff-level. More for you, if you mine. Where did they go? They went to chase dreams of hitting the mother-load mining new scam-pump coins, and will all be victims of loss. Since they are not "in the loop" on the scam. They will continue to chase their tails and collect coins that die, and complain that alt-coins are dead. (I was there once, in the beginning. Quickly changed to about five real coins, four were scams that just lived through the scams and pumps. Now I only focus on MNC, WDC, LTC, DGC, CAP, FTC and still favor CAP over all the others. The others don't have enough volatility to make money fast enough. They are too high or don't drop enough or have too much volume to contend with.)

Just be aware, that selling now is only a loss to you. It is a major gain to someone else. They won't feel bad for your surrender or loss, they will be glad they got a great deal and ride it to the moon.

There was only one issue with forking, which was resolved months ago, within less than a month. All coins have forking issues at some point. There were many forks, but it was all the same single issue, which has not been seen since then. BTC had hundreds of forks and thousands of drops. We had one major drop, which is less than 2% of the volume, because 98% are holding or selling higher than the 2% of idiots selling so low. I don't know why you can't see that, as an investor. As a user and an investor, it is great. Cheap coins to buy!

Did you buy many BTC when it fell from 250 to 100? Then rose back to 350? You had months to buy those, or trade coins for that drop, knowing the ASIC herd was eventually going to demand more from their value/losses/investments. Heck, right now you can get a whole new rig for half-price, if you had gotten BTC when it was low. Now bottlecaps are low. (Seeing the point?)

When you see 80% of the volume listed for the asking price now, that is when you get scared and jump ship. (Like the other alts, where almost 90% are listed for trade.) Even BTC is only trading like 7% volume at these prices.