[ANN] STRAKS - A POW/Masternode Cryptocurrency focused on e-commerce utility

[Marco Bignoses]

Really funny ppl who talk about sigt and comparing the price with Straks and also talking about the price of a coin not listed atm and calculatin MC like if in this world a 100mln of MC is not possible for a good [Suspicious link removed]d project need time, consider that u r not the only one genius in this world that undestand everything. LOL

[1713882700]

1713882700

[Bumbr]

Hashrate has nothing to do with this.  The reason its not profitable is because for some bizarre reason the devs are offering a coin swap with a completely unrelated shitcoin that trades for pennies.  This coin isn't even in the realm of covering electricity costs.   You could put in your info into whattomine, scroll to the very bottom, mine the coin in last place, sell it and buy sigt and you would make 100x more money.

Dude, miners should care about profitability themselves, not devs. There was a lot of hype around sigt, now there a lot of hype around MN's, so this coin is enough popular, and ppl just rushed to mine and made it not profitable compared to sigt price. That's all.

LOL coming from someone with -4 trust.  The fact that you can buy another coin for a swap cheaper than mining shows how unfair this coin is.  If its cheaper to buy another coin who is going to mine it?  If its not mined, how does the blockchain move?  A coin swap in this case literally serves no purpose other than to pad the wallet of bagholders.  Say what you want, but certainly the devs are holding a significant amount of SIGT.  And if they are not, they are complete fucking idiots, because this coin will never be more valuable than 4x the value of SIGT, which is essentially worthless.  Imagine what would happen to the value of the American dollar if the government announced that it would start exchanging $1 for 4 Venezuelan Bolivars.

Lol what, there is a lot of ppl around, who hold a lot amount of sigt, and this -4 trust this guy got in sigt thread when tried to argue vs hero members, who like to abuse trust rating. In this community this -4 = +40, so shut up please   And this is great that devs gave opportunity to sigt holders. All swap conditions has been voted by community and was known a long ago before the launch. So what are you talkning about? Anyone could buy a lot of sigt before the launch, there was a lot of time. All your philosophy about american dollar is a crap, like all your hate and FUD  
So much hate, why? Because sigt now is cheap and you can't mine and sell yet another 100000% ROI P&D masternode coin at the launch?  

[nsummy]

I'm surprised by all the people complaining it's not profitable to mine. The coin was just launched, what did you expect? Looking at the network hash rate it's obvious that there are way too many people mining Straks and trying to get instantly rich. It doesn't work that way.  Over time the hash rate will go down and then mining will become profitable. But for now buying Sigt is the best way to get Straks. It's obvious Sigt is currently under valued: Sigt was at 1000 - 1200 sats before shit hit then fan.

Congrats to Straks team for the successful launch. It seems things are working much more smoothly than for example with Bitcoin Gold.

Hashrate has nothing to do with this.  The reason its not profitable is because for some bizarre reason the devs are offering a coin swap with a completely unrelated shitcoin that trades for pennies.  This coin isn't even in the realm of covering electricity costs.   You could put in your info into whattomine, scroll to the very bottom, mine the coin in last place, sell it and buy sigt and you would make 100x more money.

FUDing hard, eh? Of course network has rate has everything to do with profitability. If Ethereum network hash rate was one tenth of what it is now, then Ethereum would be ten times more profitable to mine. Same applies for Straks.

Let's compare the numbers to Vertcoin since it uses the same algorithm, Lyra2V2. Vertcoin networks hash rate is around 2.5 TH/s. Straks peaked at 1 TH/s and now it's around 150 GH/s. Vertcoin block reward is 20 coins per minute while Straks has 10 coins per minute. One vertcoin costs around 50k sats at the moment. Doing the math, Straks should a have a value of 6000 sats to be on the same level as Vertcoin. However, Vertcoin is almost four years old while Straks is a few days old. What you're asking is completely unreasonable. Give the coin some time and it will flourish.

The point you are missing is that Vertcoin (or any other coin for that matter) is not tied to the value of SIGT.  If the swap is 4 to 1, common sense dictates that it will be impossible for Straks to have more value than 4x the value of SIGT.  This isn't FUD, this is economics.  Approximately 13,680 Staks are mined a day.  Current value of SIGT is 342 sats, which is artificially inflated, but the current value none the less.  With that in mind, .046 BTC, or $375 total is mined per day.  I can't think of a scenario where this would be profitable, unless there were under 100 miners at work.  But lets put forget that detail for now and look at the amount of Straks set aside for this swap.  It would take 6.5 years of mining on this blockchain to equal the amount earmarked for swapping.  Actually it would take much longer than than that considering masternodes will take in anywhere from 30-60% of the block rewards, but I digress.  When masternodes are enabled, there will have been 383,040 Straks mined.  This is enough for 7 masternodes for the whole community.  Yet, the amount of Straks available to swappers will be enough for 685 masternodes.  Essentially the network will be run by people who have done nothing for this coin beyond owning some unrelated coin!

Still think this is all FUD?  It should also be noted that I had to get this information off of a fucking readme.md file on their github.    Their website, forum announcement,  facebook page, reddit sub, and twitter feed make no mention of this SIGT swap.  I'm sure this was done in the spirit of "transparency."  The same readme file also states that this swap was voted on overwelmingly by 319 "community members" between Oct 30 and Nov 4 on discord and bitcointalk.  Yet this announcement thread wasn't even created until November 20.  What were the choices in the poll?  Was voting down a swap an option?  Of course not, the vote was to determine whether it would take 4 or 20 SIGT to get 1 Strak.  Its not hard to see what the obvious choice was.  Also not hard to see that this poll was only announced to SIGT owners.  You are fooling yourself if you think this coin has been created for any reason beyond pumping up SIGT!

I don't pretend to know everything, so please, point it out if anything is incorrect.  This is quite possible considering I had to glean this information from different sources, as the developers seem to conveniently omit information from this announcement.

[nsummy]

Btw, the details of the swap were communicated openly right from the start. The proper value for Sigt would be much higher if the project had not failed.   Anyway, the low value of Sigt gives you the opportunity to get Straks with a huge discount now.

Saying things like "this coin will never be more valuable than 4x the value of SIGT" is comical. It's like saying Bitcoin will never have a value of $1 in 2010. Of course the value will go higher as the project moves on. Give the coin some time to grow. The devs are doing a great job and so far have exceeded all expectations.

Could you tell me where they were communicated openly at?  As I mentioned before, its only mentioned at the very bottom of their readme on github.  And I'm sure the value of Sigt would be higher if it didn't fail.  The fact that the main avenue to acquire Straks is to buy another failed coin really says it all.  The value of bitcoin would never go higher than a dollar if the bitcoin developers held back enough bitcoin to match the amount of US dollars in circulation with the promise to swap 1 bitcoin for 4 quarters.

[brownfly]

it makes sense.

[fafelu1]

How do we get the coins? Are they available for trade?

[nsummy]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

[lupanar]

Too-many-words posts, so hard to go through all this bla-bla talking...

[Eulersheep]

Too-many-words posts, so hard to go through all this bla-bla talking...

Fantastic contribution to the dialogue sir.

[lupanar]

Too-many-words posts, so hard to go through all this bla-bla talking...

Fantastic contribution to the dialogue sir.

Yep

[Eulersheep]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

What I think is a little alarming is this.

I have ~6800 sig that I got from 1 week mining sig fairly early on that I didn't bother doing anything with. This translates to approx 1700 STRAK. Based on current network hash rates, it would take me approximately 4 months  to mine this many STRAK. It seems to me that the sig holders will be the one to control this network, but how is that fair? Why can't this coin be a true fresh start, without giving all the power to the people who held some unrelated coin?

[lupanar]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

What I think is a little alarming is this.

I have ~6800 sig that I got from 1 week mining sig fairly early on that I didn't bother doing anything with. This translates to approx 1700 STRAK. Based on current network hash rates, it would take me approximately 4 months  to mine this many STRAK. It seems to me that the sig holders will be the one to control this network, but how is that fair? Why can't this coin be a true fresh start, without giving all the power to the people who held some unrelated coin?

You forgot that there was a poll with 2 swap options - swap with rate 1:4 and 1:20, and as we see most people chose 1:4. It was a people choise, thats it.

[Eulersheep]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

What I think is a little alarming is this.

I have ~6800 sig that I got from 1 week mining sig fairly early on that I didn't bother doing anything with. This translates to approx 1700 STRAK. Based on current network hash rates, it would take me approximately 4 months  to mine this many STRAK. It seems to me that the sig holders will be the one to control this network, but how is that fair? Why can't this coin be a true fresh start, without giving all the power to the people who held some unrelated coin?

You forgot that there was a poll with 2 swap options - swap with rate 1:4 and 1:20, and as we see most people chose 1:4. It was a people choise, thats it.

From what I recall there was no option to not have a swap at all and create a new coin without the sig baggage.

[shibob]

Any idea why's the swap between this coin and SIGT? With ratio 4:1 of that swap, it's really not worth for mining this coin.

[TheHas]

You don't have to swap Sigt to Straks.... Anyway I'm sure the developers will have a reasonable time limit on the swap, so the price of sigt won't impact Straks after a set date. I think from that point onwards Straks can be priced based on its merits, and not clouded by whatever is happening with Sigt.

I'm happy with the swap. I mean, you don't have to swap so why should we be upset with the short term choice to do so? If you like Sigt, just keep it.

Mining Straks will find a balance point in difficulty as time goes, people will jump in and out based on profitability, as happens with all coins.

[Eulersheep]

You don't have to swap Sigt to Straks.... Anyway I'm sure the developers will have a reasonable time limit on the swap, so the price of sigt won't impact Straks after a set date. I think from that point onwards Straks can be priced based on its merits, and not clouded by whatever is happening with Sigt.

I'm happy with the swap. I mean, you don't have to swap so why should we be upset with the short term choice to do so? If you like Sigt, just keep it.

Mining Straks will find a balance point in difficulty as time goes, people will jump in and out based on profitability, as happens with all coins.

It's not about what coin I like or don't like, it's about the integrity of the network. What's the point in mining it when sig holders will just dump at below mining cost once they're able. It doesn't make any sense to tie the coins together this way, it only hurts STRAKS and makes it seem like a scam. 1 week of mining sig for me translates to 4 months worth of mined STRAKS coins...? There should have just been 0 coins outside mined coins.

[OXUS]

You don't have to swap Sigt to Straks.... Anyway I'm sure the developers will have a reasonable time limit on the swap, so the price of sigt won't impact Straks after a set date. I think from that point onwards Straks can be priced based on its merits, and not clouded by whatever is happening with Sigt.

I'm happy with the swap. I mean, you don't have to swap so why should we be upset with the short term choice to do so? If you like Sigt, just keep it.

Mining Straks will find a balance point in difficulty as time goes, people will jump in and out based on profitability, as happens with all coins.

It's not about what coin I like or don't like, it's about the integrity of the network. What's the point in mining it when sig holders will just dump at below mining cost once they're able. It doesn't make any sense to tie the coins together this way, it only hurts STRAKS and makes it seem like a scam. 1 week of mining sig for me translates to 4 months worth of mined STRAKS coins...? There should have just been 0 coins outside mined coins.

ow wait someone get it in this forum 

[lupanar]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

What I think is a little alarming is this.

I have ~6800 sig that I got from 1 week mining sig fairly early on that I didn't bother doing anything with. This translates to approx 1700 STRAK. Based on current network hash rates, it would take me approximately 4 months  to mine this many STRAK. It seems to me that the sig holders will be the one to control this network, but how is that fair? Why can't this coin be a true fresh start, without giving all the power to the people who held some unrelated coin?

You forgot that there was a poll with 2 swap options - swap with rate 1:4 and 1:20, and as we see most people chose 1:4. It was a people choise, thats it.

From what I recall there was no option to not have a swap at all and create a new coin without the sig baggage.

This option is coming from default, to swap or not your Sigt is up only to you.

[skorpion]

I have a proposal for an exchange ... you can certainly not take it into account, but at least think about it.
You offer exchange through a bot ... SIGT-STRAKS and sell 0.25 STRAKS for 1 SIGT, ​​everyone is already used to trading on the exchange, this exchange will be more transparent and simple.
Further the offer on destruction of coins SIGT.
Make a video shoot, with 3-4 cameras simultaneously from different angles, as you transfer coins from the stock exchange or other purse to your SIGT wallet, show that this wallet is on this hard drive. Further in real time with generate several SIGT wallets, show what they are just generating and from them there are no keys to which translate all the information from the main to these in different parts. And then also in real time, you break the hard drive with a sledgehammer ....
this will make a good advertisement !!!!
all shoot one scene without editing ..... can be done in several receptions, during the exchange

[Eulersheep]

I want to congratulate the developers with a successful start, it was one of the best starts in recent times.
 Smooth transition to the mainnet and accessibility for all platforms.

LOL, in recent times?  Hardly.  This started out with devs saying it could only be mined using a built-in cpu miner with a confusing script that would launch multiple daemons.  I'm sure their plan all along was to mine with their GPUs while the idiots wasted cpu cycles.  They waxed poetic as to how different this coin was and how it was too advanced for pools or miners to implement.  Only when pools did actually implement it because its nothing more than a standard algo did they change their tune. Lets not forget that rewards started 2 days after the stated time.  If you ask me, this ranks as the 2nd worst start in recent times, ranking right after Bitcoin Gold.

This was a simple statement of facts, but it appears you have a certain narrative that you are content on aligning your re-wording towards. There are 1250 coins on the market today, if for some reason STRAKS is not a currency that you would like to be a part of, I am certain that there are other currencies out there that will resonate with you. Nobody is forced to trade nor direct mining power towards STRAKS if they do not want to. At no point did we "change our tune" as you state, it is simply just a fact that the protocol is newer than what there currently is on the market.

The protocol is too new for mining pools to be able to easily implement it without any updates implemented to pools. Our hopes were that CPU mining would have lasted longer, so that even the hobby miner would have had a chance to get on board (the farms today can make it difficult for the small hobby miner to get on board) but while monitoring hashrates it became evident that someone had managed to crack it a day before launch. All credit goes to Decker from Deckerpool (https://t.me/deckerpool) who managed to update yiimp to the new protocol. After we managed to locate him, we approached him and agreed to pay him a bounty in exchange for making the code open source to the public (https://github.com/DeckerSU/yiimp/tree/straks), so that pools could be set up, miners would have a leveled playing-field and lastly so that the hashing power could be decentralised across multiple pools. If we were, as you state, holding onto a GPU miner ourselves, I am not exactly sure why we would go to the effort to pay someone for their source code for GPU mining? I addressed this very concern several pages ago too (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2433318.msg24952030#msg24952030).

A core value to STRAKS is transparency. Under no circumstance will we ever compromise on that value. We know the cryptocurrency market is crowded with nefarious individuals, we seek to shake that up by doing our part to create an ethical corner in this crowded space of nefarious individuals.

Fair enough, but I am a proud owner of a few Straks currently, so in the spirit of this being community driven and transparent, I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.  And I don't want to argue semantics, but Decker really only updated the stratum code, and from what I can tell, it looks like the main sticking point was the 5% rake the devs take from the blocks.  Suprnova implemented this coin and they don't even use yiimp.  Strange that a russian pool that previously was solely dedicated to mining SIGT would come up with this update though.  Anyway, I just thought it seemed kind of shady to make it sound like there was some giant technical advancement preventing GPU mining, when the real problem was that no one had implemented it with the stratum protocol and ccminer doesn't support getworktemplate.  CPUMiner-opt does support getblocktemplate though, so if this really had started as a cpu only venture, anyone could have used that to mine to the daemon instead of a goofy hack to run multiple daemons.

What I think is a little alarming is this.

I have ~6800 sig that I got from 1 week mining sig fairly early on that I didn't bother doing anything with. This translates to approx 1700 STRAK. Based on current network hash rates, it would take me approximately 4 months  to mine this many STRAK. It seems to me that the sig holders will be the one to control this network, but how is that fair? Why can't this coin be a true fresh start, without giving all the power to the people who held some unrelated coin?

You forgot that there was a poll with 2 swap options - swap with rate 1:4 and 1:20, and as we see most people chose 1:4. It was a people choise, thats it.

From what I recall there was no option to not have a swap at all and create a new coin without the sig baggage.

This option is coming from default, to swap or not your Sigt is up only to you.

Again, this is not the case I am trying to make. Of course it is up to you whether you want to swap your sig or not, but the fact is plenty of people WILL swap their sig, and that is what hurts the network as a whole.