[ANN] [MINT] Mintcoin (POS / 5%) [NO ICO] [Fair distro, community maintained]

[leckey]

I wished mintcoin had more gambling sites.



i've seen only 2 so far

Does that include the one I posted earlier?

[1713581903]

1713581903

[1713581903]

1713581903

[1713581903]

1713581903

[1713581903]

1713581903

[1713581903]

1713581903

[stormia]

Hi,

I pondered the idea behind Mintcoin Fund/Project F and I believe it is fundamentally broken.

I don't care about Mintcoin. I don't care about Blackcoin, DogeCoin or whateverCoin. I don't care about any particular coin (save for getting rich quick) and I believe you should not either.

What matters is "does a coin, a project, bring something worthwhile for the society?". This is not about mintcoin, this is about the planet. Mintcoin is just a mean (a useful one, still). But other coins have good ideas too. Promoting only one coin would be very individualistic - "we are right, you are wrong". Let alone duplication of efforts (deadmanwalking was vocal about Mintcoin doing the same as Leafcoin, for instance).

That is why I am considering extending Project F to encompass more than mintcoin. Introducing the concept of Value Added for the Society, of VAS (an obvious pun on VAT).

If a coin brings something useful for the society, it should be promoted. Otherwise, it should not. Granted, one may argue "who are you to decide what is right and what is wrong"? Well human beings, and human being are imperfect, but they keep trying to get better. And so we will.

The basic bylaws won't change much - this is mainly the name and the object (article 2) that will change.
It is of very important to be able to stick to verifiable, factual criteria for promoting a coin. Here how it will go:

- No ressource intensive (be it for mining or for transactions).. Bitcoin/litecoin/dogecoin are out. Mintcoin and Blackcoin are in. Peercoin is out because, despite having PoS, its PoW phase is way too long. NXT if in, of course, like any pure PoS (like faircoin). A hypothetical "lightning-fast PoW" (no more than, say, two months of PoW) would be eligible
- No premine. Yep, not even for country coin, even it they have the best of intentions and they actually deliver (like Auroracoin did yesterday)
- other criteria as you see fit.

There would be two kind of criteria: mandatory and facultative. Mandatory criteria are stoppers, other just orient the decision. I'd say ressource-intensivness and premine should be mandatory.
The boundary of a criterium should be written clearly, to avoid as much arbitrary decision as possible.

Now, what would this fund do?
It would raise awareness for a coin, because said coin is expected to have Value Added for the Society. For instance (and now I am back to mintcoin), the fund could host project related to mintcoin's ideal, like sustainable development. It could be financed in a lot of different way: premine, collaborative donation (doge4water did not need any premine to work for instance). The technicalities of the tunding are up to the coin. The fund will host project, like an incubator for projects.
Of course, since the first "hosted coin" would be mintcoin, mintcoin would have a greater visibility than the other coins (at least in the beginning).

Now, I need your input:
- first, do you understand my vision (whether you agree or not)?
- second, if you agree with it, who would like to be part of it?


Thank you for reading

Quick remark (haven't had the time to formulate a full response), you mention not allowing coins to join that have a premine but Mintcoin had a premine, and it is that premine which will fund the formation of this foundation (that was the impression I was under). So, Mintcoin will be spending its premine to build a foundation which other coins (which have long criticized/bashed us for having a premine *cough* BC *cough*) will then be able to join for free? They will be benefiting from the premine that they have long targeted in their attempts to sabotage the progression of this coin? I'm not sure I understand...

Edit: In other words: If we are going to be using the mintcoin premine to fund this foundation, how can we allow coins like BC to benefit equally without paying equally especially considering the fact that they have, since the very beginning, painted the fact that we have a premine as a negative and used that fact against mintcoin and as a means of promoting BC in comparison... It just all seems kinda backwards..

[stormia]

Don't get me wrong, I think its an extremely progressive and wonderful idea. But, I've also been noticing you have been much more active on the BC forum than on here lately, and I can't help but wonder how much your recent investments in BC play a role in this transition.

[David Latapie]

This all makes sense, but I am a bit disappointed. I was hoping that this project and foundation would benefit Mintcoins and be another reason for people to get interested in them. It was a selling point in my mind. This idea, while probably smart, will absolutely dilute the focus on any individual coin. It sounds more like a new and separate project divorced from Mintcoin, to me.

First coin will be mintcoin. There is already one small and one big project related to mintcoin. I would really like to give mintcoin a preferred position, but I don't know how to do it. Any idea welcomed.

[Stinky_Pete]

Brilliant idea! Spread it on all the relevant coin threads.

What would be involved in 'being a part of it'?

I have Blackcoin, Mintcoin, EEC and others. I have no particular favourite.

[Miner232432]

- No premine. Yep, not even for country coin, even it they have the best of intentions and they actually deliver (like Auroracoin did yesterday)
- other criteria as you see fit.

There would be two kind of criteria: mandatory and facultative. Mandatory criteria are stoppers, other just orient the decision. I'd say ressource-intensivness and premine should be mandatory.
The boundary of a criterium should be written clearly, to avoid as much arbitrary decision as possible.

Then you cannot include Mint and its premine, you either are fair and include any with premine or exclude all premined coins including Mint

To allow one and exclude all others on this principle present a critical flaw for what you are trying to achieve by not being biased.

It also would exclude Noble which is by far the most VAS exclusive coin currently in circulation

[David Latapie]

Quick remark (haven't had the time to formulate a full response), you mention not allowing coins to join that have a premine but Mintcoin had a premine, and it is that premine which will fund the formation of this foundation (that was the impression I was under). So, Mintcoin will be spending its premine to build a foundation which other coins (which have long criticized/bashed us for having a premine *cough* BC *cough*) will then be able to join for free? They will be benefiting from the premine that they have long targeted in their attempts to sabotage the progression of this coin? I'm not sure I understand...

Edit: In other words: If we are going to be using the mintcoin premine to fund this foundation, how can we allow coins like BC to benefit equally without paying equally especially considering the fact that they have, since the very beginning, painted the fact that we have a premine as a negative and used that fact against mintcoin and as a means of promoting BC in comparison... It just all seems kinda backwards..

Premine: Mintcoin will be an exception (that's one way to give mintcoin a preferred position, by the way). I am not sure if the premine will be used for the foundation. The dev made it clear the premine is for the mintcoin foundation. One way to have the best of both world is if dev is OK for financing a mintcoin project inside a larger (but mainly mintcoin-driven) foundation.
Project from other coin will have to be financed by the said coin. Leafcoin want to raise crops in Gobi desert? Alright, make sure to gather the coin by yourself, leafcoin. All we provide is the structure, not the funds.
As for visibility, it could be something like "powered by the mintcoin community", for instance. As I said, this is still a work in progress.

[deadmanwalking]

Hi,

I pondered the idea behind Mintcoin Fund/Project F and I believe it is fundamentally broken.

I don't care about Mintcoin. I don't care about Blackcoin, DogeCoin or whateverCoin. I don't care about any particular coin (save for getting rich quick) and I believe you should not either.

What matters is "does a coin, a project, bring something worthwhile for the society?". This is not about mintcoin, this is about the planet. Mintcoin is just a mean (a useful one, still). But other coins have good ideas too. Promoting only one coin would be very individualistic - "we are right, you are wrong". Let alone duplication of efforts (deadmanwalking was vocal about Mintcoin doing the same as Leafcoin, for instance).

That is why I am considering extending Project F to encompass more than mintcoin. Introducing the concept of Value Added for the Society, of VAS (an obvious pun on VAT).

If a coin brings something useful for the society, it should be promoted. Otherwise, it should not. Granted, one may argue "who are you to decide what is right and what is wrong"? Well human beings, and human being are imperfect, but they keep trying to get better. And so we will.

The basic bylaws won't change much - this is mainly the name and the object (article 2) that will change.
It is of very important to be able to stick to verifiable, factual criteria for promoting a coin. Here how it will go:

- No ressource intensive (be it for mining or for transactions).. Bitcoin/litecoin/dogecoin are out. Mintcoin and Blackcoin are in. Peercoin is out because, despite having PoS, its PoW phase is way too long. NXT if in, of course, like any pure PoS (like faircoin). A hypothetical "lightning-fast PoW" (no more than, say, two months of PoW) would be eligible
- No premine. Yep, not even for country coin, even it they have the best of intentions and they actually deliver (like Auroracoin did yesterday)
- other criteria as you see fit.

There would be two kind of criteria: mandatory and facultative. Mandatory criteria are stoppers, other just orient the decision. I'd say ressource-intensivness and premine should be mandatory.
The boundary of a criterium should be written clearly, to avoid as much arbitrary decision as possible.

Now, what would this fund do?
It would raise awareness for a coin, because said coin is expected to have Value Added for the Society. For instance (and now I am back to mintcoin), the fund could host project related to mintcoin's ideal, like sustainable development. It could be financed in a lot of different way: premine, collaborative donation (doge4water did not need any premine to work for instance). The technicalities of the tunding are up to the coin. The fund will host project, like an incubator for projects.
Of course, since the first "hosted coin" would be mintcoin, mintcoin would have a greater visibility than the other coins (at least in the beginning).

Now, I need your input:
- first, do you understand my vision (whether you agree or not)?
- second, if you agree with it, who would like to be part of it?


Thank you for reading

Well, first let me say I never said anything about leafcoin...I had to look it up just to know what it was..maybe you confused me with someone else? I did suggest throwing some funds behind green energy projects.

Second- Unfortunately, I don't understand your vision.  I do view other coins as direct competition, and hold the opinion that Mint is superior. This I have been vocal about.

Really, I guess it will be up to the community. I'm curious how the developer feels about this too? Will you be using Mint funds for the project?

Edit: I see you answered the question about Mint funds.

[David Latapie]

Don't get me wrong, I think its an extremely progressive and wonderful idea. But, I've also been noticing you have been much more active on the BC forum than on here lately, and I can't help but wonder how much your recent investments in BC play a role in this transition.

I will be honest: I am quite invested in the BC forum for the simple reason that I make money with BC and not with mintcoin. If tomorrow I was making money with GreatCoin, I would be invested in GreatCoin forum. I have no problem with that. Plus, I got some very interesting idea from people at BC (namely ssaCEO), which encouraged me to look beyond one single coin. Actually, there is an idea that would come from no existing coin. That's also why I don't want to be restricted to one coin (and at the same time pay tribute to the coin I come from).

Beside, the mintcoin community has a much deeper ideal than the blackcoin community, IMHO. Until recently, there were mostly there for the money only. The multipool changes this a bit. The now feel invested with holy crusade against shitcoins. But still, money is the main goal. Which is normal: our dev mentioned several time how environment matters for him and I don't remember getting any societal message from blackcoin devs.

That's also why the two communities are really different. And on blackcoin community, I am preaching rapprochement with mintcoin, with some success. No more bashing, for instance.

Brilliant idea! Spread it on all the relevant coin threads.

Thanks So far, said relevant thread are mintcoin and blackcoin. For a simple reason: they are the one I know and like (for different reasons, see my previous post). Before posting to others, let's be sure we got the right criteria for choosing. I propose we stick with mintcoin and blackcoin first, possibly with a focus on mintcoin. Going too far fast too fast would be detrimental.

What would be involved in 'being a part of it'?

PM me your email address and what you are good at (SEO, webmastering, webdesign, legal, accountancy, community management, documentation, writing... On top of it, fundraising proficiency could be a plus)

[okaynow]

You can now order a custom made teeshirt and pay it with mint, thanks to moolah.
Check out some of my work at atrapos::Moolah Market
PM me for questions or details

[David Latapie]

Then you cannot include Mint and its premine, you either are fair and include any with premine or exclude all premined coins including Mint

To allow one and exclude all others on this principle present a critical flaw for what you are trying to achieve by not being biased.

It also would exclude Noble which is by far the most VAS exclusive coin currently in circulation

I am OK with giving mintcoin an unfair advantage. This is mintcoin's dev who planted the seed of a foundation in my head. Privilege of the first. All long as it is known to everyone... As I said, I really want mintcoin to stand apart in one way or another, as a tribute to where the fund come from.
Other option: we allow premine but with extra scrutiny regarding the sincerity of the devs. This will take time and could be unsecure but as long as people are ready to do it, I'm fine with it (I noticed that a lot of project fail because of the lack of motivation or human ressources - so diluting ressources to investigate the "cleanliness" of a premined coin might jeopardize the whole project).
I will probably create a process for acceptance. The said process could easily integrate a "premine investigation" part. This would make integration longer, but otherwise should be fine.

On which ground would you exclude Noblecoin? I only know this coin by name.
I just created VAS coins. This is an empty spreasheet where you can propose coins.

Well, first let me say I never said anything about leafcoin...

That must be me getting confused. Apologies.

I had to look it up just to know what it was..maybe you confused me with someone else? I did suggest throwing some funds behind green energy projects.

Second- Unfortunately, I don't understand your vision.  I do view other coins as direct competition, and hold the opinion that Mint is superior. This I have been vocal about.

Really, I guess it will be up to the community.

Exactly. Anyway, I propose we don't talk much about the "umbrella aspect". Just see it as a possibility.

[Miner232432]

Then you cannot include Mint and its premine, you either are fair and include any with premine or exclude all premined coins including Mint

To allow one and exclude all others on this principle present a critical flaw for what you are trying to achieve by not being biased.

It also would exclude Noble which is by far the most VAS exclusive coin currently in circulation

I am OK with giving mintcoin an unfair advantage. This is mintcoin's dev who planted the seed of a foundation in my head. Privilege of the first. All long as it is known to everyone... As I said, I really want mintcoin to stand apart in one way or another, as a tribute to where the fund come from.
Other option: we allow premine but with extra scrutiny regarding the sincerity of the devs. This will take time and could be unsecure but as long as people are ready to do it, I'm fine with it (I noticed that a lot of project fail because of the lack of motivation or human ressources - so diluting ressources to investigate the "cleanliness" of a premined coin might jeopardize the whole project).
I will probably create a process for acceptance. The said process could easily integrate a "premine investigation" part. This would make integration longer, but otherwise should be fine.

On which ground would you exclude Noblecoin? I only know this coin by name.
I just created VAS coinsThis is an empty spreasheet where you can propose coins.

Noble has premine, however that premine is completely transparent, they issue reports on where the money is going and what it's being used for, along with the dev not being an anonymous entity which is rare for alt coins.

I would support your endeavour but only if you altered your premine conditions like you suggest only because I do not believe privilege or bias should be a factor dictating what coin gets selected or not. In fact I encourage you to alter your pre mine conditions just so your cause retains moral integrity because including a premined coin whilst excluding all others just on the grounds of it gave you the idea does not resonate well with the general concept of what you're trying to achieve and will only bite you in the ass later on at some point.

However I think, first of all you should try and gather a group of collective like minded individuals and form a council of sorts in order to discuss objectively and unbiased what rules you will impose for coin selection and then remain as the decision makers for coin selections judging whether coin has met criteria or not. As I think one person deciding the rules for such a project despite it being their project may undermine the end goals of the project, when people start asking why coin x wasn't chosen when coin y was. It's harder to argue against a group decision than a sole decision

[deadmanwalking]

David,

I'm afraid you won't have my support for a foundation that isn't Mintcoin specific.

Also, I would like to address the elephant in the room:

The Mintcoin Task Manager saying he doesn't care about Mintcoin? Also, you are much involved in the Blackcoin thread.

I'm sorry, but I don't see us holding hands with blackcoin or any other coin. Reading the comments over at Blackcoin, I think they feel the same. Which is fine, may the best coin win. It's just kind of hard to fight that battle when the community has to counter trolls spreading FUD, and now it seems our team leader is more interested in other coins than he is Mintcoin.

Were you not paid out of the pre-mine to do a job? Do you feel you are holding up to your end of the bargain?

[stormia]

Then you cannot include Mint and its premine, you either are fair and include any with premine or exclude all premined coins including Mint

To allow one and exclude all others on this principle present a critical flaw for what you are trying to achieve by not being biased.

It also would exclude Noble which is by far the most VAS exclusive coin currently in circulation

I am OK with giving mintcoin an unfair advantage. This is mintcoin's dev who planted the seed of a foundation in my head. Privilege of the first. All long as it is known to everyone... As I said, I really want mintcoin to stand apart in one way or another, as a tribute to where the fund come from.
Other option: we allow premine but with extra scrutiny regarding the sincerity of the devs. This will take time and could be unsecure but as long as people are ready to do it, I'm fine with it (I noticed that a lot of project fail because of the lack of motivation or human ressources - so diluting ressources to investigate the "cleanliness" of a premined coin might jeopardize the whole project).
I will probably create a process for acceptance. The said process could easily integrate a "premine investigation" part. This would make integration longer, but otherwise should be fine.

On which ground would you exclude Noblecoin? I only know this coin by name.
I just created VAS coins. This is an empty spreasheet where you can propose coins.

Well, first let me say I never said anything about leafcoin...

That must be me getting confused. Apologies.

I had to look it up just to know what it was..maybe you confused me with someone else? I did suggest throwing some funds behind green energy projects.

Second- Unfortunately, I don't understand your vision.  I do view other coins as direct competition, and hold the opinion that Mint is superior. This I have been vocal about.

Really, I guess it will be up to the community.

Exactly. Anyway, I propose we don't talk much about the "umbrella aspect". Just see it as a possibility.

Isn't blackcoin against NobleCoin, and Mintcoin, and basically every other coin it perceives as competition (all coins)? This is the feeling I have gotten from spending time on all of these forums. I like the idea of working with other coins, and I have been trying to quell some of the hostility between mintcoin and blackcoin myself. But, the blackcoin community hasn't expressed any desire to work with any other coin- quite the opposite they are always talking about destroying all the coins in their path, and how much better they are than every other coin. And they've also never expressed any desire to take an environmental or humanitarian position.

Recently, from the BC forum:

Quote from: Rofo on Today at 12:03:20 AM
"For all those wondering why your payouts in BC are so poor on the amazing new multi-pool, it's because they sit on NobleCoin when we're the 30th+ most profitable. A few of the BC community as well as a decent amount of pump & dumpers on Twitter despise NobleCoin, so if you're looking for good returns for your hashrate you won't find it there." /endquote

[Miner232432]

I am OK with giving mintcoin an unfair advantage.

I forgot to highlight this glaring issue as well

If you have conflict of interests which results in you being ok to give mintcoin an unfair advantage then your project will look to serve only mintcoins needs and not the needs of the goals of the project.

No other coin will want to get involved while your interest is clearly only in the gains for mintcoin with other coins and the project itself as a second consideration.

As long as this stance remains then I and I expect alot of others will not be able to support the project.

Goals of the project should be first & foremost above everything else including Mint

[okaynow]

Isn't blackcoin against NobleCoin, and Mintcoin, and basically every other coin it perceives as competition (all coins)?

No, not really, don't get caught up in this false dilemma.
You might get this picture, but this is a smokescreen.

Coins are currencies and as such they are financial tools.
It is up to the user to make good use of the available tools.

Obviously some tools are better than others,
but the myCoin vs yourCoin attitude comes from the devteams and the users should not get carried away.

[David Latapie]

deadmanwalking,

I was very disappointed by the attitude of the blackcoin forumers. Nothing exists beyond their dear coin. Now I understand better communautarism. And this is fortunate I make the experience now and not ten years before when I was not psychologically prepared to such a petty mentality.

I also note that you neither understand rhetoric. Or maybe that was just me being not clear enough. When I say something like "I don't care about mintcoin", I thought everyone understood this is a rhetorical formula! Is is that difficult to understand?

Rhetorics 101: to arrange words and sentence in such a way that it will make an impact on the listener/reader, who will better remember the message (the message here being: "Strenght in Unity").

I've not been paid out to do a job. I volunteered to do a job and then I got a reward after that. This was a gift, not a payment, I never asked for anything and there was not bounty attached to it. I do this because I like it, not because I am being paid (plus, the reward was the equivalent of 30 euros. I do this in less than one day so if I was doing this for money, I would have left long ago - no, I would not even have accepted).

Now if you excuse me, I have a foundation to set up. And since blackcoin has such a communautarist mentality, that will be a mintcoin foundation. The good news is that I won't have to change the bylaws.

[gonzoucab]

again looking at leaf?

"We are launching the first and biggest ever charity fundraising using Crypto currency online"

i agree on the idea... but its interesting how the two coins appear to try to compete with each other.

or another coincidence?

Full disclosure: the first time I heard about leafcoin was when we where designing the mintcoin logo. I never ever read the ANN for leafcoin, I know nothing about it.
So, yes, a coincidence. Easy to explain: environmentalism is a widespread issue these days.

As for how they will compete (or not): I don't know. Maybe one will eclipse the other, maybe they will both find a niche. Time (and good will) will tell.

We need an ideological manifest for the fundation

[stormia]

I am OK with giving mintcoin an unfair advantage.

I forgot to highlight this glaring issue as well

If you have conflict of interests which results in you being ok to give mintcoin an unfair advantage then your project will look to serve only mintcoins needs and not the needs of the goals of the project.

No other coin will want to get involved while your interest is clearly only in the gains for mintcoin with other coins and the project itself as a second consideration.

As long as this stance remains then I and I expect alot of others will not be able to support the project.

Goals of the project should be first & foremost above everything else including Mint

Says the guy with only Blackcoin in his sig.... If this project is to be initially funded and spearheaded by the Mintcoin premine and community, then the primary goal of the project should be to advance Mintcoin along side the humanitarian/environmental cause. If we want to form a coalition between multiple coins where all the coins are to be treated equally and given the same priority, then it will need to be formed by equal contributions from all of the coins involved. Blackcoin should not be allowed to ride the waves of our premine that it has always had so much fun defaming mintcoin with.

[David Latapie]

We need an ideological manifest for the fundation

Good idea. I propose a collaborative writing here: Mintcoin Fund Manifesto