[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[Taylor05]

First issue... so you deleted your posts showing your "one-time" association with XMR, then claim that you aren't associated with XMR (conveniently fail to mention the fact that you were once), and then claim not to be a liar?
a) Why would you delete old posts?
b) Lying by omission is still lying... you are therefore a liar

Second issue... I've pointed out many times, that it doesn't matter to me whether the high emission rate was planned or not. My head is not "in the sand". I wouldn't invest in any stock that didn't have properly motivated management, and the same is true of cryptocurrencies, and I would recommend the same to anyone looking to invest in the space. I LIKE Dash precisely because Evan and the rest of the team is properly incentivized as significant "shareholders". Even if you assume the emission rate was planned, that fact remains true... Evan is highly financially motivated to deliver (as he should be). I wouldn't invest in any coin for which the core developer didn't have this motivation and neither should you. So your attempts to try to convince me that it was planned miss the point... I simply don't care and neither does anyone who's got serious money to invest in this space.

Your final point... PROOF that it was planned by showing me that after 5:55am, Evan had accumulated a whopping 5,000 Dash? That was 10 blocks by 8 hours into the life of the coin, or 10 of the 1750 that had been created by that time. Oh, yeah... clearly Evan had a giant mining rig ready to go to get less than 0.6% of the block rewards. Looks like you have your smoking gun! Haha!!!

Let's do some simple math, shall we? Let's assume that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks (that's the worst case scenario... you can't assume he mined more than 100%). If we simply determine the network hash rate for the first 100 blocks (using the networkhashps command in the Dash wallet), you can see that there was only 12.6kh/s... this is clearly one (very weak) CPU and the first 100 blocks were mined in a few minutes... it probably took some time to add the other machines he and his friends had at the ready. But from blocks 100-500 the average jumps to 711.2kh/s and appears pretty steady that whole time. Let's assume that this 711.2kh/s is Evan and his friends. They would have gotten about 245,000 of the first 250,000 coins mined (through block 500).

By block 500, things start to change. A few others are clearly joining them by this point, but assuming the 711 of the 895 kh/s were theirs from block 500-600, then they still got 79% of those blocks too (worth about 40,000 Dash). If you repeat this process to figure out the share of each block of 100 they got, you get something like the following:

EDIT: The coin start and coin finish are the beginning total coins in circulation and ending coins in circulation for each set of 100 blocks... so the difference is how many were created for each 100 block section... multiply that by the dev's share and you can see where I get the numbers from.


http://imgur.com/Se5USkw

Each row represents 100 blocks. As you can see, by about block 1,000, the hashrate was up dramatically... this is consistent with posts on BTC of many other miners saying they were up and running. There are a couple of points at which network hash drops, consistent with the fact that a couple of bug fixes went out which probably caused Evan and other miners to stop mining for a brief time to update. By block 2300, Evan and Co's share was probably less than 1% of the network hash rate, by which time these estimates would put them at about 511k coins. After that, there is little chance they got a decent share... maybe another 6,000 coins for the next 1,000 blocks, but basically the party was over by then, so to speak. So if you assume they got about 518k coins by the time they were consistently getting less than 1% of the coins, that represents less than 8.8% of the current number of coins in circulation... which is very consistent with the statements from Evan that "all of the founders" hold less than 10% of the current supply combined.

These assumptions are generous to the "instamine" haters for several reasons:

1) It assumes that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks, which we know isn't true. There was at least one other developer at that time, I believe a friend of Evan's, but I'm not sure... so the "instamine" would have been split at least between two people
2) It assumes no one else was mining for the first 500 blocks (which may be the case... we'll never know, but I make this assumption in the interests of being conservative)
3) It assumes that Evan and Co had absolutely no down time for updating their miners, which is impossible... any downtime would reduce these assumptions
4) It assumes that once huge amounts of mining power joined beginning at block 500 that Evan didn't start experiencing an elevated level of rejects... this is unlikely as well since blocks were being created so rapidly at that time - literally seconds apart on average - that he and many others reported rejects, getting on wrong chains, having to reset, etc. Evan would have no way to be immune to these issues caused by the rapid creation of the blocks and network latency, so the true "networkhashps" is clearly understated during that period because many blocks were rejected and not counted.
5) It assumes that he never sold any Dash

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

So yes, you are a liar and Evan is truthful.

[Taylor05]

I saw a good exit opportunity.....

You need to get help.

Encyclopedia of scam defending

I've disclosed several times that i did hold XMR at one point.. should i mention it in every single post from now on?  

1) If you are going to put me in quotes, don't put your own text... it's unethical
2) No, you don't need to mention it in every post, but don't be surprised for being called out for lying by omission
3) I never claimed to know that the high emission rate was planned or not... I presented facts that everyone can draw their own conclusions from. You on the other hand post statement like "the intentional instamine is really obvious to anyone with even just a handful of brain cells". Oh, that's helpful. My calculations in my last post practically prove that even under the most pessimistic of scenarios, Evan's claims about how much of the early emissions he received appear to be honest.

I have never claimed to know either way whether the high emission rate was planned or not. AND NEITHER SHOULD YOU. No one but Evan will ever know that. But the data and evidence seem to point to the fact that it was accidental, that Evan acted quickly to correct it, and that the data supports a very plausible scenario in which Evan's statements about how much he holds are accurate, EVEN UNDER GENEROUS ASSUMPTIONS toward your position.

Until you can show evidence that actually supports your allegations, you simply aren't going to convince anyone. The only evidence that I've ever seen you present is the emission rate and therefore it was planned. In 20 minutes, I just did an exercise to show that even if you make a bunch of generous assumptions, Evan's version of the story holds up and he and all other founders combined clearly do hold less than 10% of the coin, as they've repeatedly stated. The only way they could plausibly have more is if they bought it on the open market at then-current market rates... in which case, good for them, they deserve the gains if they bought back in January and February of 2014.

Show me ONE piece of evidence or make an argument as to why my analysis is flawed. Until then, shut up about the supposed premeditated instamine. No one cares except for you.

[gusterdd]

I saw a good exit opportunity.....

You need to get help.

Encyclopedia of scam defending

I've disclosed several times that i did hold XMR at one point.. should i mention it in every single post from now on?  

1) If you are going to put me in quotes, don't put your own text... it's unethical
2) No, you don't need to mention it in every post, but don't be surprised for being called out for lying by omission
3) I never claimed to know that the high emission rate was planned or not... I presented facts that everyone can draw their own conclusions from. You on the other hand post statement like "the intentional instamine is really obvious to anyone with even just a handful of brain cells". Oh, that's helpful. My calculations in my last post practically prove that even under the most pessimistic of scenarios, Evan's claims about how much of the early emissions he received appear to be honest.

I have never claimed to know either way whether the high emission rate was planned or not. AND NEITHER SHOULD YOU. No one but Evan will ever know that. But the data and evidence seem to point to the fact that it was accidental, that Evan acted quickly to correct it, and that the data supports a very plausible scenario in which Evan's statements about how much he holds are accurate, EVEN UNDER GENEROUS ASSUMPTIONS toward your position.

Until you can show evidence that actually supports your allegations, you simply aren't going to convince anyone. The only evidence that I've ever seen you present is the emission rate and therefore it was planned. In 20 minutes, I just did an exercise to show that even if you make a bunch of generous assumptions, Evan's version of the story holds up and he and all other founders combined clearly do hold less than 10% of the coin, as they've repeatedly stated. The only way they could plausibly have more is if they bought it on the open market at then-current market rates... in which case, good for them, they deserve the gains if they bought back in January and February of 2014.

Show me ONE piece of evidence or make an argument as to why my analysis is flawed. Until then, shut up about the supposed premeditated instamine. No one cares except for you.

But Adamwhite is necessary poster.

[Taylor05]

I apologize to everyone else on this thread proactively. I know I'm not supposed to quote the trolls or reply to the trolls.

That said, I hope that I've added some incremental insight, analysis, and arguments that is valuable counter-arguments against the trolls' claims.

[TanteStefana2]

Leeloo, walls do you see?

We could easily revisit 6 for a restest. Then again, we could visit anywhere in between and keep bouncing back. There's been 2 retests of the 9 levels already in the last 6 weeks and this is the third.

The interesting thing is the volume. The 3-day volume's tapering away to nothing and each retest of the 9 level was on successively less volume. That could be good or could be bad - I won't make any predictions since it's be sure to go the other way if I'm too optimistic  

Also, which market is selling and which is buying is a question that must be asked now w.r.t. Dash market analysis. Right now the currency market is selling and the reserve market's been buying. If the price drops further I'd imagine that trend might accelarate (i.e. more currency sector sellers than masternode sellers). On the other hand, if it jumps back up to 1, it looks like the masternode network population might level off where it is for now.

Interesting times ahead whichever way it goes. On economics. On technology. On commerce. Just sit tight - day trade if you feel brave - and see what happens.

I think the real reason it's down is that practically everyone traded Dash on Cryptsy, and then the article came out on Cryptsy saying they were being investiated.  Then everyone pulled their funds from Cryptsy, leaving very few to trade.  Cryptsy, no being set up to liquidate as fast as the rumor caused people to cash out, couldn't send funds, only making them look like something was up with them.  True or not, I have no idea, but in the end, it killed Dash trade.

[TanteStefana2]

First issue... so you deleted your posts showing your "one-time" association with XMR, then claim that you aren't associated with XMR (conveniently fail to mention the fact that you were once), and then claim not to be a liar?
a) Why would you delete old posts?
b) Lying by omission is still lying... you are therefore a liar

Second issue... I've pointed out many times, that it doesn't matter to me whether the high emission rate was planned or not. My head is not "in the sand". I wouldn't invest in any stock that didn't have properly motivated management, and the same is true of cryptocurrencies, and I would recommend the same to anyone looking to invest in the space. I LIKE Dash precisely because Evan and the rest of the team is properly incentivized as significant "shareholders". Even if you assume the emission rate was planned, that fact remains true... Evan is highly financially motivated to deliver (as he should be). I wouldn't invest in any coin for which the core developer didn't have this motivation and neither should you. So your attempts to try to convince me that it was planned miss the point... I simply don't care and neither does anyone who's got serious money to invest in this space.

Your final point... PROOF that it was planned by showing me that after 5:55am, Evan had accumulated a whopping 5,000 Dash? That was 10 blocks by 8 hours into the life of the coin, or 10 of the 1750 that had been created by that time. Oh, yeah... clearly Evan had a giant mining rig ready to go to get less than 0.6% of the block rewards. Looks like you have your smoking gun! Haha!!!

Let's do some simple math, shall we? Let's assume that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks (that's the worst case scenario... you can't assume he mined more than 100%). If we simply determine the network hash rate for the first 100 blocks (using the networkhashps command in the Dash wallet), you can see that there was only 12.6kh/s... this is clearly one (very weak) CPU and the first 100 blocks were mined in a few minutes... it probably took some time to add the other machines he and his friends had at the ready. But from blocks 100-500 the average jumps to 711.2kh/s and appears pretty steady that whole time. Let's assume that this 711.2kh/s is Evan and his friends. They would have gotten about 245,000 of the first 250,000 coins mined (through block 500).

By block 500, things start to change. A few others are clearly joining them by this point, but assuming the 711 of the 895 kh/s were theirs from block 500-600, then they still got 79% of those blocks too (worth about 40,000 Dash). If you repeat this process to figure out the share of each block of 100 they got, you get something like the following:

EDIT: The coin start and coin finish are the beginning total coins in circulation and ending coins in circulation for each set of 100 blocks... so the difference is how many were created for each 100 block section... multiply that by the dev's share and you can see where I get the numbers from.


http://imgur.com/Se5USkw

Each row represents 100 blocks. As you can see, by about block 1,000, the hashrate was up dramatically... this is consistent with posts on BTC of many other miners saying they were up and running. There are a couple of points at which network hash drops, consistent with the fact that a couple of bug fixes went out which probably caused Evan and other miners to stop mining for a brief time to update. By block 2300, Evan and Co's share was probably less than 1% of the network hash rate, by which time these estimates would put them at about 511k coins. After that, there is little chance they got a decent share... maybe another 6,000 coins for the next 1,000 blocks, but basically the party was over by then, so to speak. So if you assume they got about 518k coins by the time they were consistently getting less than 1% of the coins, that represents less than 8.8% of the current number of coins in circulation... which is very consistent with the statements from Evan that "all of the founders" hold less than 10% of the current supply combined.

These assumptions are generous to the "instamine" haters for several reasons:

1) It assumes that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks, which we know isn't true. There was at least one other developer at that time, I believe a friend of Evan's, but I'm not sure... so the "instamine" would have been split at least between two people
2) It assumes no one else was mining for the first 500 blocks (which may be the case... we'll never know, but I make this assumption in the interests of being conservative)
3) It assumes that Evan and Co had absolutely no down time for updating their miners, which is impossible... any downtime would reduce these assumptions
4) It assumes that once huge amounts of mining power joined beginning at block 500 that Evan didn't start experiencing an elevated level of rejects... this is unlikely as well since blocks were being created so rapidly at that time - literally seconds apart on average - that he and many others reported rejects, getting on wrong chains, having to reset, etc. Evan would have no way to be immune to these issues caused by the rapid creation of the blocks and network latency, so the true "networkhashps" is clearly understated during that period because many blocks were rejected and not counted.
5) It assumes that he never sold any Dash

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

So yes, you are a liar and Evan is truthful.

Very nicely done!  You took the time to figure it all out!  I wouldn't have known where to start, LOL.  Thanks!

[TanteStefana2]

I saw a good exit opportunity.....

I don't think you'd know "good" if it wafted in though your window one day and offered to lift you up out of your angry pissed-off hell-hole of a life.

I just looked back through your posting history. You are one of the saddest, angriest, unhappy and wholly negative individuals I've come across.

It's not just Evan Duffield you're pissed about, it's the iGotSpots dev, the guy running the LTC vs Dash thread, the Bay area guy selling Clams for a premium, qwizzie, Otoh, Sub-Ether, illodin, GhostPlayer, toknormal, aleix, wozzek23. Minotaur26, bigrcanada....in fact virtually everyone except shining "beacons of hope" like iCEBREAKER (ha!).

In 10 pages of your last posts there isn't a single positive, complimentary, encouraging or appreciative post. It's all negative, hateful, angry, take-down, threatening, vengeful and oh-so-unhappy frustration.

You need to get help.

(EDIT: And what's just so gobsmackingly ironic is your buddha avatar. Astounding choice given your nature and countenance)

If only that'd fit in my sig

I know, right?

[TanteStefana2]

I apologize to everyone else on this thread proactively. I know I'm not supposed to quote the trolls or reply to the trolls.

That said, I hope that I've added some incremental insight, analysis, and arguments that is valuable counter-arguments against the trolls' claims.

You're forgiven 'cause that was a hell of a post up there, LOL

[Solarminer]

Leeloo, walls do you see?

We could easily revisit 6 for a restest. Then again, we could visit anywhere in between and keep bouncing back. There's been 2 retests of the 9 levels already in the last 6 weeks and this is the third.

The interesting thing is the volume. The 3-day volume's tapering away to nothing and each retest of the 9 level was on successively less volume. That could be good or could be bad - I won't make any predictions since it's be sure to go the other way if I'm too optimistic  

Also, which market is selling and which is buying is a question that must be asked now w.r.t. Dash market analysis. Right now the currency market is selling and the reserve market's been buying. If the price drops further I'd imagine that trend might accelarate (i.e. more currency sector sellers than masternode sellers). On the other hand, if it jumps back up to 1, it looks like the masternode network population might level off where it is for now.

Interesting times ahead whichever way it goes. On economics. On technology. On commerce. Just sit tight - day trade if you feel brave - and see what happens.

I think the real reason it's down is that practically everyone traded Dash on Cryptsy, and then the article came out on Cryptsy saying they were being investiated.  Then everyone pulled their funds from Cryptsy, leaving very few to trade.  Cryptsy, no being set up to liquidate as fast as the rumor caused people to cash out, couldn't send funds, only making them look like something was up with them.  True or not, I have no idea, but in the end, it killed Dash trade.

BTC is up too.  From $227 Sept 20th to $254 today.  Makes the relative DASH/BTC look lower, but DASH/$ is pretty stable.  Guessing on why BTC is up? Gemini exchange.

[gusterdd]

I apologize to everyone else on this thread proactively. I know I'm not supposed to quote the trolls or reply to the trolls.

That said, I hope that I've added some incremental insight, analysis, and arguments that is valuable counter-arguments against the trolls' claims.

You're forgiven 'cause that was a hell of a post up there, LOL

+1, pearls before swine in Adam's case but an excellent analysis for the rest of us.

+2  good analysis Taylor05, good work.
      trolls give chance to review coin history, distribution etc.

[TheLazieR]

Let's do some simple math, shall we? Let's assume that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks (that's the worst case scenario... you can't assume he mined more than 100%). If we simply determine the network hash rate for the first 100 blocks (using the networkhashps command in the Dash wallet), you can see that there was only 12.6kh/s... this is clearly one (very weak) CPU and the first 100 blocks were mined in a few minutes... it probably took some time to add the other machines he and his friends had at the ready. But from blocks 100-500 the average jumps to 711.2kh/s and appears pretty steady that whole time. Let's assume that this 711.2kh/s is Evan and his friends. They would have gotten about 245,000 of the first 250,000 coins mined (through block 500).

By block 500, things start to change. A few others are clearly joining them by this point, but assuming the 711 of the 895 kh/s were theirs from block 500-600, then they still got 79% of those blocks too (worth about 40,000 Dash). If you repeat this process to figure out the share of each block of 100 they got, you get something like the following:

EDIT: The coin start and coin finish are the beginning total coins in circulation and ending coins in circulation for each set of 100 blocks... so the difference is how many were created for each 100 block section... multiply that by the dev's share and you can see where I get the numbers from.

https://i.imgur.com/Se5USkw.png
http://imgur.com/Se5USkw

Each row represents 100 blocks. As you can see, by about block 1,000, the hashrate was up dramatically... this is consistent with posts on BTC of many other miners saying they were up and running. There are a couple of points at which network hash drops, consistent with the fact that a couple of bug fixes went out which probably caused Evan and other miners to stop mining for a brief time to update. By block 2300, Evan and Co's share was probably less than 1% of the network hash rate, by which time these estimates would put them at about 511k coins. After that, there is little chance they got a decent share... maybe another 6,000 coins for the next 1,000 blocks, but basically the party was over by then, so to speak. So if you assume they got about 518k coins by the time they were consistently getting less than 1% of the coins, that represents less than 8.8% of the current number of coins in circulation... which is very consistent with the statements from Evan that "all of the founders" hold less than 10% of the current supply combined.

These assumptions are generous to the "instamine" haters for several reasons:

1) It assumes that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks, which we know isn't true. There was at least one other developer at that time, I believe a friend of Evan's, but I'm not sure... so the "instamine" would have been split at least between two people
2) It assumes no one else was mining for the first 500 blocks (which may be the case... we'll never know, but I make this assumption in the interests of being conservative)
3) It assumes that Evan and Co had absolutely no down time for updating their miners, which is impossible... any downtime would reduce these assumptions
4) It assumes that once huge amounts of mining power joined beginning at block 500 that Evan didn't start experiencing an elevated level of rejects... this is unlikely as well since blocks were being created so rapidly at that time - literally seconds apart on average - that he and many others reported rejects, getting on wrong chains, having to reset, etc. Evan would have no way to be immune to these issues caused by the rapid creation of the blocks and network latency, so the true "networkhashps" is clearly understated during that period because many blocks were rejected and not counted.
5) It assumes that he never sold any Dash

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

Evan is truthful.

This is really nice and very informative , would your mind if this be published somewhere else ? or will you published a nice blog somewhere about this information?

[bigrcanada]

Instamined,  and proud it happened! Instamined was a great stroke of good luck.  Stop scaring people with nonsense.

[Taylor05]

Let's do some simple math, shall we? Let's assume that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks (that's the worst case scenario... you can't assume he mined more than 100%). If we simply determine the network hash rate for the first 100 blocks (using the networkhashps command in the Dash wallet), you can see that there was only 12.6kh/s... this is clearly one (very weak) CPU and the first 100 blocks were mined in a few minutes... it probably took some time to add the other machines he and his friends had at the ready. But from blocks 100-500 the average jumps to 711.2kh/s and appears pretty steady that whole time. Let's assume that this 711.2kh/s is Evan and his friends. They would have gotten about 245,000 of the first 250,000 coins mined (through block 500).

By block 500, things start to change. A few others are clearly joining them by this point, but assuming the 711 of the 895 kh/s were theirs from block 500-600, then they still got 79% of those blocks too (worth about 40,000 Dash). If you repeat this process to figure out the share of each block of 100 they got, you get something like the following:

EDIT: The coin start and coin finish are the beginning total coins in circulation and ending coins in circulation for each set of 100 blocks... so the difference is how many were created for each 100 block section... multiply that by the dev's share and you can see where I get the numbers from.


http://imgur.com/Se5USkw

Each row represents 100 blocks. As you can see, by about block 1,000, the hashrate was up dramatically... this is consistent with posts on BTC of many other miners saying they were up and running. There are a couple of points at which network hash drops, consistent with the fact that a couple of bug fixes went out which probably caused Evan and other miners to stop mining for a brief time to update. By block 2300, Evan and Co's share was probably less than 1% of the network hash rate, by which time these estimates would put them at about 511k coins. After that, there is little chance they got a decent share... maybe another 6,000 coins for the next 1,000 blocks, but basically the party was over by then, so to speak. So if you assume they got about 518k coins by the time they were consistently getting less than 1% of the coins, that represents less than 8.8% of the current number of coins in circulation... which is very consistent with the statements from Evan that "all of the founders" hold less than 10% of the current supply combined.

These assumptions are generous to the "instamine" haters for several reasons:

1) It assumes that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks, which we know isn't true. There was at least one other developer at that time, I believe a friend of Evan's, but I'm not sure... so the "instamine" would have been split at least between two people
2) It assumes no one else was mining for the first 500 blocks (which may be the case... we'll never know, but I make this assumption in the interests of being conservative)
3) It assumes that Evan and Co had absolutely no down time for updating their miners, which is impossible... any downtime would reduce these assumptions
4) It assumes that once huge amounts of mining power joined beginning at block 500 that Evan didn't start experiencing an elevated level of rejects... this is unlikely as well since blocks were being created so rapidly at that time - literally seconds apart on average - that he and many others reported rejects, getting on wrong chains, having to reset, etc. Evan would have no way to be immune to these issues caused by the rapid creation of the blocks and network latency, so the true "networkhashps" is clearly understated during that period because many blocks were rejected and not counted.
5) It assumes that he never sold any Dash

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

Evan is truthful.

This is really nice and very informative , would your mind if this be published somewhere else ? or will you published a nice blog somewhere about this information?

Go right ahead and use the analysis and anything else that I've posted, including the evidence that the emission rate was in error... It's for the good of the community. You might have to go through my post history as I think I've posted a bunch of counter-arguments before.

Maybe if Adam and ICEBreaker keep posting on here it will rile me up again to refine the analysis a bit... that was my quick and dirty effort. I'm sure there's more data I could analyze like the IP addresses of nodes people were posting, the winning addresses of miners, etc. that could add further evidence that refutes these clearly exaggerated claims.

Those guys just don't get it... "it" being so many many things.

[moocowmoo]

I ♥ Taylor05.  Great posts!

[BagHolder010]

Great post Taylor05, AdamWhite/IceBreaker or any hater from that coin please stop hating now.

[iCEBREAKER]

[Great Wall of Duff-splaining]

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

So yes, you are a liar and Evan is truthful.

Even admits Dash's Instamine exists.  His dishonesty comes from his Duff-splanations of how that Instamine luckily just happened to be exactly the thing X/Darkcoin/Dash needed, Because Reasons.

[toknormal]

saddest, angriest, unhappy and wholly negative individuals I've come across....negative, hateful, angry, take-down, threatening, vengeful and oh-so-unhappy frustration.

LoL !  I suppose you've got to start somewhere if you see yourself as an ethics authority and 'policeman'.

Just as well Taylor05 has given him something to aspire to.

[sundowner]

Duff-splanation
I like that. Lets use that when we need explanation from Evan on technical stuff.  Thanks icedude.

[AzzAz]

Call me paranoic, but all this @ Cryptsy now looks like coming from same kitchen as trolling here.
 Cryptsy was No.1 for DASH trading!

[illodin]

Withdrew a few hundred DASH from Cryptsy, no problems. Maybe the amount was small enough, maybe I got lucky, or maybe their problems aren't DASH related.