[POT]PotCoin - Banking for the Legal Cannabis Industry ✦ ✦ ✦Grow With Us ✦ ✦ ✦

[deanpreese66]

I'm not concerned about what could be done with 2%, I would just like to know what it's all about.  In my mind it's just a premine after the fact.

-Fuse

I am not going to defend the DEVS -- but I will offer a different perspective.


POT is not just another flash in the pan coin that will be gone in a few months. Its a real team, with a business plan and focus on bricks and mortar usage. This is a VERY unique and unusual thing in the crypto world (most are created by devs whose entire purpose in to pump and dump and walk away) With the zillion other cryptos out there, you can't achieve adoption without focus and business like mentality.

Yes, I agree -- this entire discussion is the equivalent of a premine after the fact -- but with so many in circulation, decreasing supply is not a bad thing.

Coins are a commodity. Real companies that drill for oil or mine gold, do all they can do to manage and hedge the price. And do what ever they can do to make more money.  We all would like to see POT at a higher price and we all would like to see more adoption -- I believe adoption and price are connected much tighter than most consider. 

Meaning -- if POT was valued at even $1 USD... the payment structure simplifies and it takes fewer fragmented transactions to actually purchase something, which means easier processing for vendors and customers. Moreover, perception changes.  POT would be seen as viable ...  1-to-1 for real dollars and usable for real transactions.

In the end its supply n demand.  Right now there is too much supply.  Most people here only focus on on the demand side- so lets talk on the supply side. I think you have to ask yourself the question --- "If this was my business and I wanted to manage and control supply - how do I accomplish that?"

1)  POT run or managed POOL - lots of configurations here are a couple - could be a multipool that mines other coins and pays out in POT -- could be a pool with high hashpower that just mines POT for the "company"  In any case it has the opportunity to take coins out of circulation -- decreasing supply.

2)  Buy POT directly from the exchanges to support/increase price.  At the time of this writing -- I could have bought 100% of the volume from Cryptsy for 6.4 BTC -- around $4000 USD  -- its not a huge market. Not that it would make sense but if someone did buy 6.4 BTC -- where would the price be?  If my math is right, that's over 600K coins  and in any case -- it would decrease supply.

3)  Trade POT on the key exchanges ( in the trading world this could be akin to market making )  This activity by itself should stabilize the price and flatten the peaks and valleys. It happens all the time in equity, FOREX and futures markets.

4)  Remember, cryptos almost always carry a "network transaction fee" for sending it around network. So, in concept this is not a new thing.  I am not sure the exact usage of the above stated "tax" but consider this -- an additional fee that is assigned for transaction above a certain threshold, XXX BTC would only impact big pools and pumpers/dumpers that are manipulating the price by buying and selling large volumes. This would cause them to either pay the "tax" of make smaller trades on the exchanges -- smaller trades would be eaten up by the general market and price would swing less.  And if they choose to make the big transactions, rather than fight it directly ,,,, make money from it.


Unfortunately -- we here are the geeks (I am part of this group and freely admit it); people in the early adopter bleeding edge of this movement. As a result we nitpick and over think every movement and twitch and in the world of always on, the lack of movement is perceived negatively. 

The average person does not care and never will - they want function.  How many people really care about PayPal fees?  Customers don't because in the end, it just works. This movement, legalization, POT -- its not about the geeks (the minority) -- its about the majority. The majority will make this successful and thrive. That majority just want it to work.

[ny2cafuse]

I am not going to defend the DEVS -- but I will offer a different perspective.


POT is not just another flash in the pan coin that will be gone in a few months. Its a real team, with a business plan and focus on bricks and mortar usage. This is a VERY unique and unusual thing in the crypto world (most are created by devs whose entire purpose in to pump and dump and walk away) With the zillion other cryptos out there, you can't achieve adoption without focus and business like mentality.

What business plan?  They went to the 420 event to get high and hang out.  Having a true plan would have meant they would have been dressed professionally and had media kits to hand out to vendors.

And this whole approach isn't rare... it's the goal.  Create a currency and have a legitimate use for it.  Fuck, man... take a look at NLG and see what they've succeeded in doing in half the time of POT.  POT has been around for how long now, and it's still working on the broken promise that it will be the industry standard.  There is one dispensary taking the coin, but they aren't even taking it for POT.  Hell, I even asked if there was any incentive to take POT at the dispensary on the 28th, and what happens on the 29th, they offer a 10% discount on merch.  I'm not saying I was the reason for that, but rather that should have been thought of from the get-go.  There is no planning...

Yes, I agree -- this entire discussion is the equivalent of a premine after the fact -- but with so many in circulation, decreasing supply is not a bad thing.

We just decreased supply, or did you forget what has been going on for the last month?  Do we really need to decrease supply even more?

Coins are a commodity. Real companies that drill for oil or mine gold, do all they can do to manage and hedge the price. And do what ever they can do to make more money.  We all would like to see POT at a higher price and we all would like to see more adoption -- I believe adoption and price are connected much tighter than most consider. 

Actually, the people here have been talking about adoption.  I just mentioned it.  Hell the dev even said that the reason that they wanted the halving was that there was too many coins and not enough use for them.  I think people have considered adoption as the weak link in the chain for this coin for a long time.

Meaning -- if POT was valued at even $1 USD... the payment structure simplifies and it takes fewer fragmented transactions to actually purchase something, which means easier processing for vendors and customers. Moreover, perception changes.  POT would be seen as viable ...  1-to-1 for real dollars and usable for real transactions.

1POT:1$ would mean that the "Foundation" has $588k in the donation wallet.  I don't think they need more unless things seriously start to change with the adoption.

In the end its supply n demand.  Right now there is too much supply.  Most people here only focus on on the demand side- so lets talk on the supply side. I think you have to ask yourself the question --- "If this was my business and I wanted to manage and control supply - how do I accomplish that?"

Wrong.  In the end, it's adoption.  You're contradicting yourself now.  Make up your mind, mate.

1)  POT run or managed POOL - lots of configurations here are a couple - could be a multipool that mines other coins and pays out in POT -- could be a pool with high hashpower that just mines POT for the "company"  In any case it has the opportunity to take coins out of circulation -- decreasing supply.

2)  Buy POT directly from the exchanges to support/increase price.  At the time of this writing -- I could have bought 100% of the volume from Cryptsy for 6.4 BTC -- around $4000 USD  -- its not a huge market. Not that it would make sense but if someone did buy 6.4 BTC -- where would the price be?  If my math is right, that's over 600K coins  and in any case -- it would decrease supply.

3)  Trade POT on the key exchanges ( in the trading world this could be akin to market making )  This activity by itself should stabilize the price and flatten the peaks and valleys. It happens all the time in equity, FOREX and futures markets.

Again... this should have been in the "business plan".  Right now the only plan is "Use POT to buy stuff".

I support ASICs backing the blockchain.  DOGE has a good plan in this respect.

As far as buying POT goes, sure... spend the $4000 on the POT to buy everything on the market.  But what happens after that?  You need constant pressure on the market.  TAG was able to keep the floor at a specific price because the millionaire owner of the coin was keeping it up.  He was actively buying TAG constantly, and still is.  But you need the revenue to do that.

4)  Remember, cryptos almost always carry a "network transaction fee" for sending it around network. So, in concept this is not a new thing.  I am not sure the exact usage of the above stated "tax" but consider this -- an additional fee that is assigned for transaction above a certain threshold, XXX BTC would only impact big pools and pumpers/dumpers that are manipulating the price by buying and selling large volumes. This would cause them to either pay the "tax" of make smaller trades on the exchanges -- smaller trades would be eaten up by the general market and price would swing less.  And if they choose to make the big transactions, rather than fight it directly ,,,, make money from it.

A transaction fee is minimal.  What is it, 0.001-0.01?  And in the end the fees go to the miners that make the transactions happen.  A 2% fee on top of that is absurd.  Until verified, it's not on transactions over a specific threshold, it's a on all blocks.

And again, you're not making sense.  You say that the "foundation" should create a pool or buy up the pot on exchanges.  Then you say big pools and people who manipulate price should be taxed.  So you tax the taxer?  In programming terms, you just found a memory leak.

Unfortunately -- we here are the geeks (I am part of this group and freely admit it); people in the early adopter bleeding edge of this movement. As a result we nitpick and over think every movement and twitch and in the world of always on, the lack of movement is perceived negatively. 

The average person does not care and never will - they want function.  How many people really care about PayPal fees?  Customers don't because in the end, it just works. This movement, legalization, POT -- its not about the geeks (the minority) -- its about the majority. The majority will make this successful and thrive. That majority just want it to work.

And you're back to adoption.  Man, Dean... that was a rollercoaster.

-Fuse

[CartmanSPC]

...presuming folks were required to view the source code before using it, or that they do. Most folks, even pool ops, just hurry up and compile to keep their systems from accumulating downtime. There have been numerous opensource exploits not caught until after damage has been done. While this wasn't implemented, it's very odd to not have some description there.

Look at it this way, nobody to date has caught it. Imagine how many hundreds of thousands of potcoin could've been skimmed/stolen? Only 1 individual out of the userbase noticed this?

This is so true...as a pool op I recall going as far as quickly reviewing the code (most don't); seeing that part and thinking "that's odd" but noticed it was commented out. I moved on since I was in a rush to compile.

[Chronikka]

Actually, the people here have been talking about adoption.  I just mentioned it.  Hell the dev even said that the reason that they wanted the halving was that there was too many coins and not enough use for them.  I think people have considered adoption as the weak link in the chain for this coin for a long time.

I think its fair to say that adoption is the weak link for every crypto currency, bitcoin included.

Its not so simple just to say that we need adoption. At this point we can all waste time arguing the supply and demand of the coin but ultimately it comes back to what you have been alluding to: A solid business plan and publicity.

Most people who would actually consider using Potcoin probably don't even know it exists. Right now we are a niche market inside of a niche market. Potheads who like crypto currency.

We all want adoption for the coin. It starts by first letting people know it exists. Participation in events, handing materials out, etc. You alluded to a number of these things and I think you've hit on the head.

Now back to the original point regarding the foundation address...IMO the legitimacy of this code depends entirely on what they intend to use it for. If they are using those coins to fund something that benefits the coin then great. Consider it an expenditure in their business model, which we have all bought stock in. But the question is what benefit? Not all are equal. Funding a legalization effort is great but lets be honest legalization is going to happen anyway. Potcoin funding will make no difference. There are better ways to use those coins. Use them to pay for ad space, leaflets,coin handouts at dispensaries, etc.

Are there plans for signs at this new office? It was announced and very little was said about it afterward. It seems like an excellent place to try and slap a Potcoin sign or something on the outside of the building. Use the 2% in coins to help pay for it. Handouts and working with dispensaries is nice but ultimately you need Potcoin to be seen by as many eyes as possible. Even if it doesn't stick with most of them. People should know what Potcoin is before they walk into a dispensary. That way they can ask about it inside, instead of being told about it inside for the first time. It puts pressure on dispensaries to consider the coin more seriously if people already know about it.

[jheaton]

Good grief... there is not one of you people bitchin about 2% that would do it all for free.

[deanpreese66]

Fuse --

Your parsing my words far to critically.  I said within this that everyone else is talking about adoption ... adoption is obviously slow. So lets look at the other side of the supply and demand equation --  I wanted to look at it differently.  

Additionally -- I never said any of this SHOULD be done ... it is all offered as observations and ideas.

What business plan?  They went to the 420 event to get high and hang out.  Having a true plan would have meant they would have been dressed professionally and had media kits to hand out to vendors.

And this whole approach isn't rare... it's the goal.  Create a currency and have a legitimate use for it.  Fuck, man... take a look at NLG and see what they've succeeded in doing in half the time of POT.  POT has been around for how long now, and it's still working on the broken promise that it will be the industry standard.  There is one dispensary taking the coin, but they aren't even taking it for POT.  Hell, I even asked if there was any incentive to take POT at the dispensary on the 28th, and what happens on the 29th, they offer a 10% discount on merch.  I'm not saying I was the reason for that, but rather that should have been thought of from the get-go.  There is no planning...

I can agree business plan -> yet to be seen.  But if you look at the other coins out there POT seems to be trying to do the right things - that's my point. And Yes, there are a handful coins that have goals for being the next Bitcoin ... or even moreover better and bigger.  My point is that most coins have no goals other than to make devs money. I do not consider POT to be one of those coins.

We just decreased supply, or did you forget what has been going on for the last month?  Do we really need to decrease supply even more?

We did not just decrease supply. We decreased the rate of future supply .... that is a different issue.  The current glut of coins is a component of the current price being low.

Actually, the people here have been talking about adoption.  I just mentioned it.  Hell the dev even said that the reason that they wanted the halving was that there was too many coins and not enough use for them.  I think people have considered adoption as the weak link in the chain for this coin for a long time.

I know people are solely focused on adoption. No doubt adoption is a major weak link.  My point is that adoption by itself, even its its amazing ... will likely never use the coins in circulation.  Which in turn means the coins will likely never achieve a reasonable value

1POT:1$ would mean that the "Foundation" has $588k in the donation wallet.  I don't think they need more unless things seriously start to change with the adoption.

Why is that an issue? Sure -- if it goes to $1 .... I have no issue with  the "Foundation" (using your words) having $588K. The same as I don't have a problem with Apple having billions in cash.  They (POT) took all the risk and therefore can capitalize on the rewards - if/when there are rewards.  I am an investor and interested geek in an experiment.

Wrong.  In the end, it's adoption.  You're contradicting yourself now.  Make up your mind, mate.

Pricing in a free market always boils down to supply and demand.  Adoption is the major component of demand.  But in this case the supply is targeted to be way larger than virtually every other major player.  And unfortunately adoption will likely never be able to use the huge quantity of coins that are being mined. So -- you either accept that price will almost always be low ... or you find ways to pull coins out of the market, increase scarcity couple with stronger adoption this should increase price

1)  POT run or managed POOL - lots of configurations here are a couple - could be a multipool that mines other coins and pays out in POT -- could be a pool with high hashpower that just mines POT for the "company"  In any case it has the opportunity to take coins out of circulation -- decreasing supply.

2)  Buy POT directly from the exchanges to support/increase price.  At the time of this writing -- I could have bought 100% of the volume from Cryptsy for 6.4 BTC -- around $4000 USD  -- its not a huge market. Not that it would make sense but if someone did buy 6.4 BTC -- where would the price be?  If my math is right, that's over 600K coins  and in any case -- it would decrease supply.

3)  Trade POT on the key exchanges ( in the trading world this could be akin to market making )  This activity by itself should stabilize the price and flatten the peaks and valleys. It happens all the time in equity, FOREX and futures markets.

Again... this should have been in the "business plan".  Right now the only plan is "Use POT to buy stuff".

I support ASICs backing the blockchain.  DOGE has a good plan in this respect.

As far as buying POT goes, sure... spend the $4000 on the POT to buy everything on the market.  But what happens after that?  You need constant pressure on the market.  TAG was able to keep the floor at a specific price because the millionaire owner of the coin was keeping it up.  He was actively buying TAG constantly, and still is.  But you need the revenue to do that.

Agree 100% .. was not suggesting a one time buy.  But pointing out that at current price levels it you could provide the support you mention without breaking the bank.

4)  Remember, cryptos almost always carry a "network transaction fee" for sending it around network. So, in concept this is not a new thing.  I am not sure the exact usage of the above stated "tax" but consider this -- an additional fee that is assigned for transaction above a certain threshold, XXX BTC would only impact big pools and pumpers/dumpers that are manipulating the price by buying and selling large volumes. This would cause them to either pay the "tax" of make smaller trades on the exchanges -- smaller trades would be eaten up by the general market and price would swing less.  And if they choose to make the big transactions, rather than fight it directly ,,,, make money from it.

A transaction fee is minimal.  What is it, 0.001-0.01?  And in the end the fees go to the miners that make the transactions happen.  A 2% fee on top of that is absurd.  Until verified, it's not on transactions over a specific threshold, it's a on all blocks.

You are correct -- we don't know the specifics. And I am not fixated on 2% being the number.  I am simply providing one method I see that a fee of this type can work and actually be good for the entire blockchain and coin.  

And again, you're not making sense.  You say that the "foundation" should create a pool or buy up the pot on exchanges.  Then you say big pools and people who manipulate price should be taxed.  So you tax the taxer?  In programming terms, you just found a memory leak.

Again your parsing ...  I am saying people who process big transactions over a specific threshold  "COULD" be taxed and by doing so COULD have a positive result.

Unfortunately -- we here are the geeks (I am part of this group and freely admit it); people in the early adopter bleeding edge of this movement. As a result we nitpick and over think every movement and twitch and in the world of always on, the lack of movement is perceived negatively. 

The average person does not care and never will - they want function.  How many people really care about PayPal fees?  Customers don't because in the end, it just works. This movement, legalization, POT -- its not about the geeks (the minority) -- its about the majority. The majority will make this successful and thrive. That majority just want it to work.

And you're back to adoption.  Man, Dean... that was a rollercoaster.

-Fuse

Yes -- it does bounce back and forth.  Intentionally. Just because this is a crypto that is decentralized and is digital, does not mean the laws if supply and demand are tossed to the side. You can't consider supply without considering its connection to demand.

Fuse .. chill man.  

This is a lot of hostility and angst directed toward me for just putting some ideas and concepts out there.  Within this forum, I have been both critical of the POT folks and positive of the POT folks. I see possibilities, but am not blinded by the shiny object in front of my face.

The world is a very gray place ... very little is black and white. I try and be objective and open to all sides and see positive in all arguments -- even if I do not see things the same way.

[Viceroy]

I'm not concerned about what could be done with 2%, I would just like to know what it's all about.  In my mind it's just a premine after the fact.

-Fuse

I forget which but a bit of code in either the original bitcoin wallet, or one of the early litecoin ports of it, had the "tax" and so it was adopted as an idea into the new wallet software which was being developed for potcoin (and orgcoin and others).  We thought it was odd when we first saw it too, that a tax was hardcoded right into the program and it was NOT commented out. We wondered about all the numbnuts who had just blindly compiled it without looking.  Let me reiterate this original open source code that the wallet was built upon had nothing to do with potcoin.

The "tax" was de-activated and was, as I said, left there for other purposes; namely to allow a licensing fee to be generated if that should become a necessary or desired feature.  And again, I am limiting this statement to the original code not the winblows derivative works.

The "foundation" is a non-profit Colorado corporation who would become the beneficiary of the licensing fee in the event the tax was turned on.  This really had more to do with Orgcoin than potcoin.  

[ny2cafuse]

Dean,

   I am chill.  The success or failure of POT is not going to affect me long term.  I'm invested in it, and have been since the beginning, but I'm not going to be a millionaire or lose my home if it shifts either way.

   That being said, I want it to succeed.  I think anyone in this thread can agree with that desire.

   However, I'm not seeing results.  I think a lot of people, yourself included, are blinded by the agenda.  Saying that POT is this great and powerful entity that is doing all these amazing things is kind of off-based.  The whole "never been done before" mantra that keeps popping up is driving me nuts.  People are right, it's never been done... and it still hasn't been done.  Until there are quantifiable results that exceed the hype, I'm going to play the pessimist card.  The business plan, or lack thereof(which you agree with), is the most troubling.  Why is there still not a list of merchants that accept POT?  I don't even know what the hell I can spend POT on.  If I come to this thread for instance, and I've never seen POT before, I would think it was a pump and dump coin.  Lots of pools and exchanges listed, but no mention of what services accept it.  How many people here know that Amagi Metals takes POT as a payment?  The only reason I know is because I frequent their site.  From an outsider's perspective, there is no clear thinking evident here... maybe too much smoke in the air.

   You ask why it's an issue that they collect more money via the fee when they already have the 588k POT in the wallet.  I don't think they should be paid if they aren't producing results.  Apple has billions because they sell billions.  As much as I loathe Apple marketing and products, they earned that money.  If POT becomes extremely successful, I will donate to the dev team again.  Them telling me I have to donate via a 2% fee is a whole other story.  That I have a problem with.

   Mate, my angst isn't towards you.  I'm just getting tired of the fluff.  To me the your post just seemed disjointed.  If that was your intention, as you pointed out, then I apologize for the point by point breakdown.

-Fuse

[ny2cafuse]

I forget which but a bit of code in either the original bitcoin wallet, or one of the early litecoin ports of it, had the "tax" and so it was adopted as an idea into the new wallet software which was being developed for potcoin (and orgcoin and others).  We thought it was odd when we first saw it too, that a tax was hardcoded right into the program and it was NOT commented out. We wondered about all the numbnuts who had just blindly compiled it without looking.  Let me reiterate this original open source code that the wallet was built upon had nothing to do with potcoin.

The "tax" was de-activated and was, as I said, left there for other purposes; namely to allow a licensing fee to be generated if that should become a necessary or desired feature.  And again, I am limiting this statement to the original code not the winblows derivative works.

The "foundation" is a non-profit Colorado corporation who would become the beneficiary of the licensing fee in the event the tax was turned on.  This really had more to do with Orgcoin than potcoin.  

Viceroy, are you part of the dev team?  I'm just wondering why the only reasonable explanation for the origin of the code is coming from you rather than the dev team.  If you are, thanks for clarifying at least some of this mystery.

However, to a skeptic like myself, adding bits of code like this during major code changes is like hiding laws in bills in the senate.  Everyone is so preoccupied with the major changes of digishield and halving that they didn't notice the precursor to a network wide tax.

Another point that kind of rubs me the wrong way though is your comment about the third party windows compilation.  Who compiles the windows client?  Is the dev team not capable of compiling a windows client internally?

-Fuse

[sirsmokesalot]

Edit: Shoulda read more before opening my yap. But yeah, so was this put in there by potcoin or is it just in the source the potcoin wallet was built on? No matter how you look at it, the devs need to speak up on it.

[ny2cafuse]

Edit: Shoulda read more before opening my yap. But yeah, so was this put in there by potcoin or is it just in the source the potcoin wallet was built on? No matter how you look at it, the devs need to speak up on it.

It was put in on the first commit that mentioned digishield on May 19th.  It was added to the code with a valid POT address here:

https://github.com/potcoin/potcoin/commit/d32925a06e09debc97f3ee2a7a00ae4a7e95bf57

And then commented out here on the same day:

https://github.com/potcoin/potcoin/commit/47a188fc7d4bed8a497b692c9ffb1def80de0a86

-Fuse

[deanpreese66]

Dean,

   I am chill.  The success or failure of POT is not going to affect me long term.  I'm invested in it, and have been since the beginning, but I'm not going to be a millionaire or lose my home if it shifts either way.

   That being said, I want it to succeed.  I think anyone in this thread can agree with that desire.

   However, I'm not seeing results.  I think a lot of people, yourself included, are blinded by the agenda.  Saying that POT is this great and powerful entity that is doing all these amazing things is kind of off-based.  The whole "never been done before" mantra that keeps popping up is driving me nuts.  People are right, it's never been done... and it still hasn't been done.  Until there are quantifiable results that exceed the hype, I'm going to play the pessimist card.  The business plan, or lack thereof(which you agree with), is the most troubling.  Why is there still not a list of merchants that accept POT?  I don't even know what the hell I can spend POT on.  If I come to this thread for instance, and I've never seen POT before, I would think it was a pump and dump coin.  Lots of pools and exchanges listed, but no mention of what services accept it.  How many people here know that Amagi Metals takes POT as a payment?  The only reason I know is because I frequent their site.  From an outsider's perspective, there is no clear thinking evident here... maybe too much smoke in the air.

   You ask why it's an issue that they collect more money via the fee when they already have the 588k POT in the wallet.  I don't think they should be paid if they aren't producing results.  Apple has billions because they sell billions.  As much as I loathe Apple marketing and products, they earned that money.  If POT becomes extremely successful, I will donate to the dev team again.  Them telling me I have to donate via a 2% fee is a whole other story.  That I have a problem with.

   Mate, my angst isn't towards you.  I'm just getting tired of the fluff.  To me the your post just seemed disjointed.  If that was your intention, as you pointed out, then I apologize for the point by point breakdown.

-Fuse

Cool Brother ... I get it.    There has been a lot of fluff.  In one of the very first things I wrote here, I pleaded for communication and transparency.  That is still lacking and needed.

[Chronikka]

Edit: Shoulda read more before opening my yap. But yeah, so was this put in there by potcoin or is it just in the source the potcoin wallet was built on? No matter how you look at it, the devs need to speak up on it.

It was put in on the first commit that mentioned digishield on May 19th.  It was added to the code with a valid POT address here:

https://github.com/potcoin/potcoin/commit/d32925a06e09debc97f3ee2a7a00ae4a7e95bf57

And then commented out here on the same day:

https://github.com/potcoin/potcoin/commit/47a188fc7d4bed8a497b692c9ffb1def80de0a86

-Fuse

Slipped in the code without a word from them about it while everybody was worrying about the halving

[ny2cafuse]

Slipped in the code without a word from them about it while everybody was worrying about the halving

Even if it all ends up being some silly oversight, that's how I see it.  Add a little at a time to sneak it through... just like politicians.

A quick search in the repo on github didn't turn up any other traces of those variables.  So if the dev team decides to stay silent about this, I would strongly advise that people thoroughly read through future github commits.

I'm still really disappointed that they haven't made a comment about this yet.  I swear to shit, if I need to go to Reddit to get a response, I'm going to have an aneurysm.

-Fuse

EDIT:

Thanks to Jahmoke and IronHammer5 for bringing this up on Reddit... still no response there from the devs.  I'm guessing they're trying to figure out a stopgap before they comment.  Link to Reddit post here for reference:

http://www.reddit.com/r/potcoin/comments/27ytg5/is_it_correct_that_recently_a_2_fee_code_was/

[PotCoin]

ICMAG

 

RIP overgrow  

Potcoin needs more of a presence on all the major cannabis forums

A banner add saying "Does your seed vendor or dispensary accept Potcoin? Ask them today!"


ICMAG gets 50000 hits a day! Why isn't potcoin advertised there?

An add banner on ozstoners $510 AUD yearly. 37760 Total Members and right now 131 visitors to the page...

thctalk.com Average visits to this page: Hourly: 173.90 Daily: 4,173.55 Weekly: 29,214.83 Monthly: 126,945.37 Yearly: 1,523,344.47


Cannabis.com Statistics

Threads: 171,972 Posts: 1,976,248 Members: 199,549
There are currently 4825 users online. 10 members and 4815 guests


grasscity.com 18,133,826 Total Posts
 553,501 Total Members  
 23,614 Most Online


and the countless other forums...


A few well placed adds could get hundreds of thousands of people talking about potcoin in no time flat!

we plan to raise money for this from the community and also match all donations.

we are working on all of our new branding that will be ready soon for a big advertising push.

[PotCoin]

Potcoin,

   I'm a bit concerned over the following code that was added to the source in the main.h file, and I wanted to see why it was added in the first place.  Also, can someone confirm that this code wasn't included in the windows build of the wallet? [snip]

-Fuse

[snip]
Either way, i am anxious to hear about this from the devs. I like the watchman vigilance thing, gotta keep them eyes peeled! Thanks Fuse!

The foundation fee is not specific to potcoin, it has always been the developers intent to implement that function with particular licensed partners of the wallet program.  In such an activation event the "Foundation", who is a registered non-profit, gets a licensing fee to maintain the software.  That is why the code exists.  It is not nefarious but an intended feature of the wallet program.  It's a holdover from the original bitcoin wallet.

And NO on the windows version, the potcoin wallet devs don't do winblows.  That windows version was compiled by another party.  

For what it's worth it should be easy to test if some percent is disappearing from the wallet and someone would have noticed a 2% fee long ago.  (Though few would notice a few missing satoshi).

When we updated the last version the creator of the coin wanted to add in the possibility of having a % taken for something if we ever needed it or if the community wanted to use to raise money for charity or maybe people who cant afford their medication. You can clearly see its commented out and is not being used.

We at first wanted to raise money for research and charity but we never implemented it and now we have in the chance we use it one day.

[PotCoin]

Potcoin launches their new website
BIGGER, BETTER, STRONGER.
We Grow Together!

http://www.potcoin.com/

[kwiktech]

we plan to raise money for this from the community and also match all donations.

we are working on all of our new branding that will be ready soon for a big advertising push.

Thats great to know I'm sure I speak for all of us when I say we cant wait to get this advertising ball rolling.

Also congratulations on the new website...


But it sux


Not because of its content or layout or anything like that. It sux because of the information it does not contain. Potcoins priorities are clearly layed out on the landing page of potcoin.com and the obvious number 1 priority is nowhere to be seen.

You don't need me to tell you that Potcoin is unlike any other crypto out there. A crypto with a built in demographic numbering in the hundreds of millions.

The vast majority of these people have no idea what a cryptocurrency is nor do they care at this moment in time.


For this reason the number 1 priority of potcoin should be securing those potential new users IMO.

The landing page of potcoin should have a video smack bang in the middle detailing how to get potcoins. A service where fiat can be exchanged directly for potcoin would be ideal but until that happens a detailed instructional vid or series is absolutely needed. 

The flowchart of a potential new user is like this at the moment;


Hears about a currency specifically for pot > googles it > lands on potcoin.com > looks around and leaves...

It needs to be;

Hears about a currency specifically for pot > googles it > lands on potcoin.com > an easy to understand detailed video is watched...


In the first example the potential new user has to first have the time and inclination to wonder what exactly a cryptocurrency is and also be motivated to pursue it further.

The second example where the potential new user can easily see a video and hopefully get an understanding of cryptocurrency and potcoin is much better. They will be far more likely to pursue potcoin further even if just for the novelty of having potcoin.


Personally THE only reason I got into crypto's was to buy potcoin. When I buy bitcoins I don't care where they are accepted I just want to get my hands on potcoin. Luckily for me I have the knowledge and ability to make it happen. The vast majority of potential new users will NOT!

They land on potcoin.com and see "invest in cannabis" boom up go the red flags and they are out of there!!! 100% guaranteed. 

People want potcoin and they are willing to thow their cash at you to get some as fast as possible even if they don't fully understand it or know how to use it.

For Gods sake make it easy for them. Words like "invest" are threatening to a lot of people and you are instantly driving them away.

The relationship between language and psychology is extremely complex. The word "invest" is attaching negatives negative connotations to Potcoin. The opposite of what your landing page should be doing!

[vesperwillow]

When we updated the last version the creator of the coin wanted to add in the possibility of having a % taken for something if we ever needed it or if the community wanted to use to raise money for charity or maybe people who cant afford their medication. You can clearly see its commented out and is not being used.

We at first wanted to raise money for research and charity but we never implemented it and now we have in the chance we use it one day.

...Soooo... basically it's a forced tribute from all potcoin users worldwide, to XYZ beneficiary whenever the 'owner' decided to flip the switch?

Why not comment in there what its future use was?

Why not add this into the git comments/explanation?

Why not simply have made it a feature within the wallet where the user could specify a percentage, a destination address, and an 'opt-in' switch?

Instead, this was slid under the door.

Not to mention, there's no easy way for folks to tell if their windows wallet has it disabled. Which is why I encourage people to check the CRC values against compiling from git source. If the CRC values vary, then there's going to be a lot of explaining to do.

[ny2cafuse]

we plan to raise money for this from the community and also match all donations.

we are working on all of our new branding that will be ready soon for a big advertising push.

New branding, or updating the existing branding?  Can we stick with something?

When we updated the last version the creator of the coin wanted to add in the possibility of having a % taken for something if we ever needed it or if the community wanted to use to raise money for charity or maybe people who cant afford their medication. You can clearly see its commented out and is not being used.

We at first wanted to raise money for research and charity but we never implemented it and now we have in the chance we use it one day.

If I want to donate to charity or research, I would donate to charity or research on my own.  You imposing a 2% tax on the coin is just that, a tax.  And yes, I can see that it was commented out in the code, as I pointed out.  It doesn't change the fact that it was never mentioned, and it appeared like an attempt to sneak it in without informing the community.

And you talk about the creator of the coin.  Who does what around here?  Can we get a list of who does what?  Something like this:

https://guldencoin.com/who-we-are/

And for the love of god, can you please clearly list places that accept POT on the website?  This has been asked numerous times before.

On a positive note... kudos on finally having a clear and concise media kit that can be given out.

-Fuse