CatholicCoin - Catholic Coin - Religion Coin

[Vlad2Vlad]

Well I am confirmed Catholic and as such can speak for every Catholic and the Pope , in saying , I'm that smarter guy.

The Pope says go ahead , we don't care , do it. Evolution is change and Change wipes away the roots we thought we had in the old.

To weather it will be a success? , well refer back to your comment about Apple stock.

Icon "Mary" the mother Goddess ?

Lol, great post, man. 

I'll take your word as being from the pope.  Lol.

Yeah, in Europe They're called icons. (Icoane.). They're really popular out there, not so much in the US.

Now I just need to find enough cash, a programmer or both.  Ha! 

Time to pray for a miracle.

[jackjack]

Will this coin be used to kill MuslimCoin and JewCoin holders?

[Explodicle]

The word 'Catholic' just means 'Universal'.
Bitcoin is already the universal coin.

That's like saying McDonalds or Coke is universal.

There's no such thing.  Bitcoin is only a first mover and is lacking in many things.  For example, what % of their coins goes to charity?  Oh, zero.  There's a problem if you're looking for a good cause coin.

Whichever amount you choose to give to charity, like all charity.

I hear you but what I'm saying is bitcoin as a company policy doesn't give a single coin to charity.  There's a big difference between them giving to charity and me as an investor or a miner giving.  It's nice when the big companies getting rich off the small guys actually give something meaningful back to society.  Any charity would be nice not necessarily Christian.

Bitcoin isn't a company, it's a protocol. It makes no more sense for Bitcoin to give to charity than for TCP/IP to give to charity. In case you're thinking the Bitcoin Foundation ought to give to charity, I'd like to point out it IS a charity intended to pay developers and coordinate real-world implementation issues.

That being said...

1) You not being Catholic shouldn't be a problem, but it will be - Catholics won't trust you.

2) Regardless of trademark legality, you need explicit church approval for this to be considered legitimate.

3) Why use a decentralized coin with centralized goals? If we have to trust a single point of failure regardless, then several Open Transactions servers would be much cheaper. This would also allow the church to more easily adjust fees and policy.

4) Learn a lesson from Freicoin: you need a complete plan, INCLUDING HOW COLLECTED FUNDS WILL BE DISTRIBUTED, before the coin is launched. Freicoin was 100% p2p up until launch, when they pulled the switcheroo and gave 80% of new coins to their foundation because they felt mining it all would be wasteful. Now Freicoin is a joke - a coin meant to prevent hoarding which is being hoarded even more than Bitcoin, by its own founders. You have a huge advantage because CatholicCoin has an obviously fair recipient for all revenue. Don't spoil that by putting the cart before the horse - get a local priest (if not a bishop) to verify his receiving address ASAP or the coin will look like a scam. Once the coin is successful this administration might move to Vatican City, but don't expect anyone to trust some random guy with revenue at launch. I can't stress this enough.

[ToxicDartFrog]

What about jehova witness coin? You go forum to forum trying to convince people you have the best alt coin using memes and wacky logic!

[Vlad2Vlad]

Will this coin be used to kill MuslimCoin and JewCoin holders?

Hmmmmmm.  Perhaps that's a feature we can hard fork if there's demand later on.  I know how crazy you are about them features. Lol.

[Vlad2Vlad]

The word 'Catholic' just means 'Universal'.
Bitcoin is already the universal coin.

That's like saying McDonalds or Coke is universal.

There's no such thing.  Bitcoin is only a first mover and is lacking in many things.  For example, what % of their coins goes to charity?  Oh, zero.  There's a problem if you're looking for a good cause coin.

Whichever amount you choose to give to charity, like all charity.

I hear you but what I'm saying is bitcoin as a company policy doesn't give a single coin to charity.  There's a big difference between them giving to charity and me as an investor or a miner giving.  It's nice when the big companies getting rich off the small guys actually give something meaningful back to society.  Any charity would be nice not necessarily Christian.

Bitcoin isn't a company, it's a protocol. It makes no more sense for Bitcoin to give to charity than for TCP/IP to give to charity. In case you're thinking the Bitcoin Foundation ought to give to charity, I'd like to point out it IS a charity intended to pay developers and coordinate real-world implementation issues.

That being said...

1) You not being Catholic shouldn't be a problem, but it will be - Catholics won't trust you.

2) Regardless of trademark legality, you need explicit church approval for this to be considered legitimate.

3) Why use a decentralized coin with centralized goals? If we have to trust a single point of failure regardless, then several Open Transactions servers would be much cheaper. This would also allow the church to more easily adjust fees and policy.

4) Learn a lesson from Freicoin: you need a complete plan, INCLUDING HOW COLLECTED FUNDS WILL BE DISTRIBUTED, before the coin is launched. Freicoin was 100% p2p up until launch, when they pulled the switcheroo and gave 80% of new coins to their foundation because they felt mining it all would be wasteful. Now Freicoin is a joke - a coin meant to prevent hoarding which is being hoarded even more than Bitcoin, by its own founders. You have a huge advantage because CatholicCoin has an obviously fair recipient for all revenue. Don't spoil that by putting the cart before the horse - get a local priest (if not a bishop) to verify his receiving address ASAP or the coin will look like a scam. Once the coin is successful this administration might move to Vatican City, but don't expect anyone to trust some random guy with revenue at launch. I can't stress this enough.

Absolutely.

First, I know bitcoin is a currency and not a company but it can donate just like one and devcoin donates lots of coins to developers so its normal and can be done.

Secondly, I'm all about transperancy.  Trust is the number one thing to have any coin succeed.  I want this thing to work long term not a pump and dump. I would give anyone access to the books and computers to gain trust.  I'm happy with making considerably less if the end goal is also to help a lot of people.  

And yes, if this were to take off I would definitely get the approval of some big name Catholic name.

But I don't think I need their permission ahead of time.  The world Catholic is public domain.  If I used their name for something bad maybe they can sue but in this case it's no different than opening up an Internet site which represents the catholic beliefs and openly donates to catholic causes and defends the catholic system.

It would be like cutting their own foot.  The only reason for it would be greed - to get the whole coin but that would look bad for them.

Thanks for your input.

[Vlad2Vlad]

What about jehova witness coin? You go forum to forum trying to convince people you have the best alt coin using memes and wacky logic!

Anaahhaaahahaaaa.  That's a sweet idea. And on the coin there would be a sweet picture of the Watchtower.

[Vlad2Vlad]

@Explodicle

I'm not sure i understand why freicoin's donation plans didn't work.  I'm not understanding you.  Is it because they were donating to blind charities nobody knew about so people just don't trust them or what are you saying?  Why did freicoin fail cause besides that fact I thought they had a noble coin.

But when I heard 80%, which is really high, and they would pick the timing and donations at a later date I immediately said:  BS, and moved on.

I wouldn't do it that way.  From day one, any coins mined (ie 25%) would go directly to the Catholic Church. They can do with it as they please. 25% for say the founders and admin, marketing, overhead, etc. and 50% for the miners.  That's a pretty fair distribution.  And no premine, all of it would be done via mining like devcoin.  They give away 80% but it's all mined.

[Explodicle]

@Explodicle

I'm not sure i understand why freicoin's donation plans didn't work.  I'm not understanding you.  Is it because they were donating to blind charities nobody knew about so people just don't trust them or what are you saying?  Why did freicoin fail cause besides that fact I thought they had a noble coin.

Freicoin hasn't failed, assuming you share my definition of "not failed" as "people are using it". But last I checked they haven't actually donated any coins from the central fund. Personally I don't have any reason to trust them, and my skepticism grows with every coin in that wallet. Figuring out how to fairly distribute money is Really Hard. That's where CatholicCoin would have a big advantage because Catholics already assume the church can distribute money fairly.

But when I heard 80%, which is really high, and they would pick the timing and donations at a later date I immediately said:  BS, and moved on.

That was my reaction too. I argued with them about it for a while, but entering those coins into circulation isn't high on their list of priorities and I couldn't think of a solution. Well, besides just eliminating the central fund completely.

I wouldn't do it that way.  From day one, any coins mined (ie 25%) would go directly to the Catholic Church. They can do with it as they please. 25% for say the founders and admin, marketing, overhead, etc. and 50% for the miners.  That's a pretty fair distribution.  And no premine, all of it would be done via mining like devcoin.  They give away 80% but it's all mined.

I suggest getting a priest or a church accountant to publish their own receiving address, so any user can independently verify that the church got its share without having to trust you.

IMHO you should emulate the Bitcoin Foundation's donation-only policy and avoid asking for another 25% beyond what's already going towards the church. That's a LOT of money!

[Vlad2Vlad]

I suggest getting a priest or a church accountant to publish their own receiving address, so any user can independently verify that the church got its share without having to trust you.

IMHO you should emulate the Bitcoin Foundation's donation-only policy and avoid asking for another 25% beyond what's already going towards the church. That's a LOT of money!

Quote:/

What?  What do you mean? How would I get paid?  How would I pay programmers, admins, marketing costs, office space, etc? This is a long term thing, its gonna take money, and nobody wants to work for free forever.  

How exactly does bitcoin does it?  And they don't have anybody at the top doing anything - just guys who happened to be lucky and hold tons of coins and now want to see bitcoin Succeed.  I wouldn't have that option.

And a successful coin requires a lot of work, why would people get upset at a total 25% profit margin which includes all overhead and marketing when a corporation keeps closer to 40% and coins like ripple premined 100 Billion adn are keeping 50 billion.  

I don't get how the founders of these coins can make money, I thought 25% total for everyone involved and for things like marketing was generous, and very frugal.  Some keep much more or premine it.  

But I agree, getting (and publishing) a reputable priest wallet address would be a must have and not an issue.

[Explodicle]

There are lots of ways you could go about funding CatholicCoin:
1) You could ask the church to reimburse you for your labor out of their 25%, or up front.
2) You could buy CC's right before a patch, watch the price go up, and then sell.
3) You could create assurance contracts for new features.

If Satoshi got 25% of all Bitcoins mined, that would be about 900 BTC per day! If you do a set percentage, you'll make nothing at first and way more than enough later on. Be careful using other coins as your benchmarks - some of them are just pump-and-dump get rich quick schemes.

And worst case scenario, there might just not be enough demand to support the coin in the first place. Sorry if this isn't helpful, I've just seen some really hostile receptions to new cryptocurrencies.

[Vlad2Vlad]

There are lots of ways you could go about funding CatholicCoin:
1) You could ask the church to reimburse you for your labor out of their 25%, or up front.
2) You could buy CC's right before a patch, watch the price go up, and then sell.
3) You could create assurance contracts for new features.

If Satoshi got 25% of all Bitcoins mined, that would be about 900 BTC per day! If you do a set percentage, you'll make nothing at first and way more than enough later on. Be careful using other coins as your benchmarks - some of them are just pump-and-dump get rich quick schemes.

And worst case scenario, there might just not be enough demand to support the coin in the first place. Sorry if this isn't helpful, I've just seen some really hostile receptions to new cryptocurrencies.

I don't understand options 2 and 3.

And why would a flat 25% be a bad idea. It's honest it's not premine and it covers everything.  I don't think people would flip cause you wouldn't make any real money for a while and you'd have to make sure the coin succeeds in order to make money so that's more incentive for miners to mine and keep your coins.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Do any other miners take offense with a coin which gives 25% of mined coins to charity, 25% to admin, marketing, overhead, etc, and the remaining 50% to miners?

I just don't see why coin founders can't make some money and do it fairly and openly.  And via mining means slow profits and it means they are an incentive to make that coin succeed. It's not like a premine where they may wait for a pump and dump.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Someone has to have an opinion on the question above.  I don't wanna do another poll but it looks like I may have to.

[Vlad2Vlad]

I just put up a poll for the question of best way to compensate founders or a coin.  Lets see what kind of responses we get.  It seems like most people are against any profit by the founders.  That's just ridiculous - it takes a lot of work and money to launch and maintain a coin.

 Is everyone a communist now, in America?  

Maybe I need to launch in China.  Lol

[Vlad2Vlad]

Will this coin be used to kill MuslimCoin and JewCoin holders?

This is an awesome response.

I don't know about awesome but it was definitely original, unexpected and made me laugh.  Not that's it's funny in a good way, but it made me laugh. 

[Vlad2Vlad]

So if it's that easy to launch a coin as people on here are saying, how many bitcoins would it take to get a programmer on here to launch a coin for me. Or to do the programming work and I'll launch it I guess. 

[Explodicle]

2) You could buy CC's right before a patch, watch the price go up, and then sell.
3) You could create assurance contracts for new features.

I don't understand options 2 and 3.

2 is essentially insider trading, which is virtually impossible to detect with cryptocurrency.
3 is just like any other assurance contract. For example, you could offer to implement a nice escrow gui in the client, or publish an educational video, once a certain number of coins have been pledged. Having a fund for each task also gives you more market-based information as to what your priorities should be. Here's a great example, how they are funding the next Open-Transactions client:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225954.0
For this OT example, instead of one person requiring X bitcoins, the bounty grows until someone claims it.

So if it's that easy to launch a coin as people on here are saying, how many bitcoins would it take to get a programmer on here to launch a coin for me. Or to do the programming work and I'll launch it I guess.  

Hazard and c4n10 will do it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208578.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224783.0

[Vlad2Vlad]

2) You could buy CC's right before a patch, watch the price go up, and then sell.
3) You could create assurance contracts for new features.

I don't understand options 2 and 3.

2 is essentially insider trading, which is virtually impossible to detect with cryptocurrency.
3 is just like any other assurance contract. For example, you could offer to implement a nice escrow gui in the client, or publish an educational video, once a certain number of coins have been pledged. Having a fund for each task also gives you more market-based information as to what your priorities should be. Here's a great example, how they are funding the next Open-Transactions client:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225954.0
For this OT example, instead of one person requiring X bitcoins, the bounty grows until someone claims it.

So if it's that easy to launch a coin as people on here are saying, how many bitcoins would it take to get a programmer on here to launch a coin for me. Or to do the programming work and I'll launch it I guess.  

Hazard and c4n10 will do it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208578.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224783.0

That's why someone said:  I gotta go see hazard.  That didn't make any sense.

Do you know how much it would cost for him to get a coin ready for launch for me.  I have no idea and I don't want to overpay cause ok pretty broke right now. I have some money but until I find a job I have to be careful case I have 2 kids to care for.

[Vlad2Vlad]

I would be curious how that insider trading option works.  I thought they could detect any coins bought, sold or mined in the block-chain.