Vertcoin holders! almost 20% of your coins were mined in the first 30 hours

[reRaise]

I just went to take a look at Litecoin graph, and I found that Litecoin is instamine too. Between 24 to 54 hrs, 514,750 coins were mined.



http://cryptometer.org/litecoin_96_hour_charts.html

 

Well that's around 2% and Quark had around 3.5%, thats nothing

[IloveAnonCoin]

I just went to take a look at Litecoin graph, and I found that Litecoin is instamine too. Between 24 to 54 hrs, 514,750 coins were mined.



http://cryptometer.org/litecoin_96_hour_charts.html

 

Well that's around 2% and Quark had around 3.5%, thats nothing

Wait a sec, are you kidding me or you totally don't understand ?

Litecoin created since 2011, there are 27.5 millions LTC in market, maximum is 84 millions.
Vertcoin created since 2014, there are 3.5 millions VTC in market, maximum is 84 millions too.

So, where is 2% come from ? if 2017, VTC has 27 millions VTC, it will be 2% too ?
I don't understand your logic, seriously.

[testigodehumanidad]

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

[Amph]

bitcoin was the most instamined shit ever

bitcoin scam?

[JwTdd]

http://cryptometer.org/vertcoin_96_hour_charts.html

None of this bodes too well for Vertcoin holders, but I'm not sure it will stop people from investing in them.

http://i57.tinypic.com/2rn7qcl.png

You have 3,500,000 total mined currently. From around hour 33 to hour 63, 600,000 coins were mined.

That's what we call an instamine.

Litecoin was also at 3,000,000 out of 84,000,000 at third month, just sayin.  http://cryptometer.org/litecoin_60_month_charts.html

[reRaise]

I just went to take a look at Litecoin graph, and I found that Litecoin is instamine too. Between 24 to 54 hrs, 514,750 coins were mined.



http://cryptometer.org/litecoin_96_hour_charts.html

 

Well that's around 2% and Quark had around 3.5%, thats nothing

Wait a sec, are you kidding me or you totally don't understand ?

Litecoin created since 2011, there are 27.5 millions LTC in market, maximum is 84 millions.
Vertcoin created since 2014, there are 3.5 millions VTC in market, maximum is 84 millions too.

So, where is 2% come from ? if 2017, VTC has 27 millions VTC, it will be 2% too ?
I don't understand your logic, seriously.

It's about the amount of % mined in the first 30 hours compared to the amount of coins existing right now,
which makes ltc around 2%, qrk 3.5% and vtc 16%

[IloveAnonCoin]

I just went to take a look at Litecoin graph, and I found that Litecoin is instamine too. Between 24 to 54 hrs, 514,750 coins were mined.



http://cryptometer.org/litecoin_96_hour_charts.html

 

Well that's around 2% and Quark had around 3.5%, thats nothing

Wait a sec, are you kidding me or you totally don't understand ?

Litecoin created since 2011, there are 27.5 millions LTC in market, maximum is 84 millions.
Vertcoin created since 2014, there are 3.5 millions VTC in market, maximum is 84 millions too.

So, where is 2% come from ? if 2017, VTC has 27 millions VTC, it will be 2% too ?
I don't understand your logic, seriously.

It's about the amount of % mined in the first 30 hours compared to the amount of coins existing right now,
which makes ltc around 2%, qrk 3.5% and vtc 16%

So, what's wrong if I compare 30 hrs after LTC and VTC were start mining ?
LTC 510k and VTC 600k, if you said VTC is instamine, so what about LTC ? not instamine ? I just apply the same logic to 2 coins which has the same total supply and block time.

[IloveAnonCoin]

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

So, you just miss leading the point.

If I apply your logic from the topic, both of VTC and LTC are instamine during the same time period which is 30 hrs after launched

So what if 2017, you bring this news to Bitcointalk again, will you say VTC is instamine 2% and LTC is not instamine ? or instamine but will less effect to Litecoin holders ?

[testigodehumanidad]

bitcoin was the most instamined shit ever

bitcoin scam?

wow...look at the graph, buddy.

It looks...so not curved...and... not instamined. Not close, actually.

Care to prove me wrong?

96 hours in...looking pretty straight forward

http://i61.tinypic.com/vh7ud0.png



90 days in...still looking COMPLETELY normal

http://i60.tinypic.com/sy3rxd.png



104 weeks in....


http://i57.tinypic.com/fc06k7.png

oh wait...what is that is see? Is that bending up a tad around 50 weeks in? Could that be slightly MORE coins being produced a year after its creation? In other words, the OPPOSITE of an instamine?

What say you?

[testigodehumanidad]

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

So, you just miss leading the point.

If I apply your logic from the topic, both of VTC and LTC are instamine during the same time period which is 30 hrs after launched

So what if 2017, you bring this news to Bitcointalk again, will you say VTC is instamine 2% and LTC is not instamine ? or instamine but will less effect to Litecoin holders ?

Sigh.


If you want me to use your own words to prove my point, so be it.

From a Darkcoin scam thread, you said...

Quote from: flipme on April 07, 2014, 10:01:56 AM
Aah, another Darkcoin scam thread.
And if so -  he'd deserve it for all the amazing work he has done.

How many Bitcoins were instamined?
That sums up to how many US $?

Are you out of your mine dude ? 22M Max Coins , 2M is 9%. I mean, it is okay to do premine 1-2%, not 9%.

So, you apparently believe it's fine to premine 1-2%. Not a universal opinion, but clearly your opinion.


In this current thread, are you trying to challenge me by saying the current 1-2% instamine for Litecoin is NOT okay, after just saying in another thread that is IS OKAY?

 

When someone instamines 16% of the coins, that is worse than a 1-2% premine, btw.

Are you also saying you don't understand the difference between an instamine where 1-2% of the coins in existence is what is being talked about vs. 16% of the coins in existence?


-----


For the record, I think Litecoin was a premine given the facts. Unfortunately, we are 2.5 years after that fact. So yes, calling out Litecoin matters much less. We should still call a spade a spade, but given 2.5 years of existence, I have to admit its more likely that a lot of those 600,000 easily gained coins have probably been sold and resold multiple times. I think peope have less to fear about a massive instamine dump with Litecoin at this point. I still question the intentions of the founders.

Vertcoin has been around since mid January. Call me crazy, but I don't think a majority of those instamined coins have left their hands just yet. I think a lot of investors could get screwed by this, and of course, I am calling into question their intentions.

[IloveAnonCoin]

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

So, you just miss leading the point.

If I apply your logic from the topic, both of VTC and LTC are instamine during the same time period which is 30 hrs after launched

So what if 2017, you bring this news to Bitcointalk again, will you say VTC is instamine 2% and LTC is not instamine ? or instamine but will less effect to Litecoin holders ?

Sigh.


If you want me to use your own words to prove my point, so be it.

From a Darkcoin scam thread, you said...

Quote from: flipme on April 07, 2014, 10:01:56 AM
Aah, another Darkcoin scam thread.
And if so -  he'd deserve it for all the amazing work he has done.

How many Bitcoins were instamined?
That sums up to how many US $?

Are you out of your mine dude ? 22M Max Coins , 2M is 9%. I mean, it is okay to do premine 1-2%, not 9%.

So, you apparently believe it's fine to premine 1-2%. Not a universal opinion, but clearly your opinion.

In this current thread, are you trying to challenge me by saying the current 1-2% premine for Litecoin is NOT okay, after just saying in another thread that is IS OKAY?

 

Are you also saying you don't understand the difference between an instamine where 1-2% of the coins in existence is what is being talked about vs. 16% of the coins in existence?


-----


For the record, I think Litecoin was a premine given the facts. Unfortunately, we are 2.5 years after that fact. So yes, calling out Litecoin matters much less. We should still call a spade a spade, but given 2.5 years of existence, I have to admit its more likely that a lot of those 600,000 easily gained coins have probably been sold and resold multiple times. I think peope have less to fear about a massive instamine dump with Litecoin at this point. I still question the intentions of the founders.

Vertcoin has been around since mid January. Call me crazy, but I don't think a majority of those instamined coins have left their hands just yet. I think a lot of investors could get screwed by this, and of course, I am calling into question their intentions.

I never want to challenge you. I just apply your very-clever-genius-awesome logic to both VTC and LTC. In Darkcoin scam topic, I compare 2 million DRKs from 22 million darks which is the total supply for Darkcoin. 2/22 = 9%

So, If I apply my logic to both VTC and LTC, both of them will be .6/84 = 0.7%

[Amph]

bitcoin was the most instamined shit ever

bitcoin scam?

wow...look at the graph, buddy.

It looks...so not curved...and... not instamined. Not close, actually.

Care to prove me wrong?

96 hours in...looking pretty straight forward





90 days in...still looking COMPLETELY normal





104 weeks in....




oh wait...what is that is see? Is that bending up a tad around 50 weeks in? Could that be slightly MORE coins being produced a year after its creation? In other words, the OPPOSITE of an instamine?

What say you?

prove me that those graphs aren't fake

[TheCoinFinder]

Firstly:

There was no "intention to creation an instamine coin" - using statistics as a basis *after the fact* to try to justify something is either foolish or idiotic. Plenty of inferences can be made in practically every statistical analysis of any set of data ever.

The fact that 20% of the *current* coins were mined in the period is pointless. Currently vertcoin has 100% of its coins mined in the current period - the current period here being about 4 months just over - an insignificant period of time for you to draw any conclusions from.

Further, those instamines went to how many addresses, and how many of these transactions were then traded and exchanged while the value of vertcoin was significantly smaller than it is now?

I presume that prior to creating this thread, you have meticulously analysed the blockchain, located all of the addresses that these coins went to, and then calculated the total trading and have come to the conclusion that None of these coins have been traded for, and that all coins were infact hoarded by one core individual? (Or perhaps you are accusing the devs of hoarding here, personally I wish they did, Vertcoin is amazing at the stage it currently is, but nope, I'm pretty sure that much like Bitcoin most of the very early adopters traded their coin away before it became anything of significant worth).

This is why I am calling this FUD, as its a partial story, with a nice looking graph.

Lets see the figures, graphs and proof first - that one or two people mined and currently hold this amount.

You may want to use this for reference:

bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-vertcoin-addresses.html

The top few addresses afaik have accumulated their coins more recently.

[testigodehumanidad]

bitcoin was the most instamined shit ever

bitcoin scam?

wow...look at the graph, buddy.

It looks...so not curved...and... not instamined. Not close, actually.

Care to prove me wrong?

96 hours in...looking pretty straight forward

http://i61.tinypic.com/vh7ud0.png



90 days in...still looking COMPLETELY normal

http://i60.tinypic.com/sy3rxd.png



104 weeks in....


http://i57.tinypic.com/fc06k7.png

oh wait...what is that is see? Is that bending up a tad around 50 weeks in? Could that be slightly MORE coins being produced a year after its creation? In other words, the OPPOSITE of an instamine?

What say you?

prove me that those graphs aren't fake

 

Let's be clear where we are at here.

You said, without evidence, that bitcoin was "the most instamined shit ever".

I provided a publicly available source that details the knowledge of coins and their inception, suggesting bitcoin was not. I am not a technical person so I can't prove or disprove it is 100% factual. However, I haven't found a single source that suggests www.cryptometer.org is "fake". The burden of proof is on you, my friend.

At this point, you should work on disproving crypotomter or somehow coming up with evidence that bitcoin was massively instamined.

[testigodehumanidad]

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

So, you just miss leading the point.

If I apply your logic from the topic, both of VTC and LTC are instamine during the same time period which is 30 hrs after launched

So what if 2017, you bring this news to Bitcointalk again, will you say VTC is instamine 2% and LTC is not instamine ? or instamine but will less effect to Litecoin holders ?

Sigh.


If you want me to use your own words to prove my point, so be it.

From a Darkcoin scam thread, you said...

Quote from: flipme on April 07, 2014, 10:01:56 AM
Aah, another Darkcoin scam thread.
And if so -  he'd deserve it for all the amazing work he has done.

How many Bitcoins were instamined?
That sums up to how many US $?

Are you out of your mine dude ? 22M Max Coins , 2M is 9%. I mean, it is okay to do premine 1-2%, not 9%.

So, you apparently believe it's fine to premine 1-2%. Not a universal opinion, but clearly your opinion.

In this current thread, are you trying to challenge me by saying the current 1-2% premine for Litecoin is NOT okay, after just saying in another thread that is IS OKAY?

 

Are you also saying you don't understand the difference between an instamine where 1-2% of the coins in existence is what is being talked about vs. 16% of the coins in existence?


-----


For the record, I think Litecoin was a premine given the facts. Unfortunately, we are 2.5 years after that fact. So yes, calling out Litecoin matters much less. We should still call a spade a spade, but given 2.5 years of existence, I have to admit its more likely that a lot of those 600,000 easily gained coins have probably been sold and resold multiple times. I think peope have less to fear about a massive instamine dump with Litecoin at this point. I still question the intentions of the founders.

Vertcoin has been around since mid January. Call me crazy, but I don't think a majority of those instamined coins have left their hands just yet. I think a lot of investors could get screwed by this, and of course, I am calling into question their intentions.

I never want to challenge you. I just apply your very-clever-genius-awesome logic to both VTC and LTC. In Darkcoin scam topic, I compare 2 million DRKs from 22 million darks which is the total supply for Darkcoin. 2/22 = 9%

So, If I apply my logic to both VTC and LTC, both of them will be .6/84 = 0.7%

See the bolded part? That is your mistake. VTC currently has 3.5 million coins. LTC has 27.5 million coins.

When you are talking about an instamine 600,000 coins, it depends on how many coins are also in existence at the time of your evaluation. The longer times goes on, the less the instamine matters.

You will understand after this scenario:

Let us say their is an instamine of 600,000 coins of something exactly like Vertcoin in every way that we are looking at now. Except one thing; this example we are looking at has a total number of coins ALREADY in creation at 1,000,000,000.

Since a 600,000 instamine doesn't even measure up to 1/1000th of a percent, that instamine matters much less.

[testigodehumanidad]

Firstly:

There was no "intention to creation an instamine coin" - using statistics as a basis *after the fact* to try to justify something is either foolish or idiotic. Plenty of inferences can be made in practically every statistical analysis of any set of data ever.

The fact that 20% of the *current* coins were mined in the period is pointless. Currently vertcoin has 100% of its coins mined in the current period - the current period here being about 4 months just over - an insignificant period of time for you to draw any conclusions from.

Further, those instamines went to how many addresses, and how many of these transactions were then traded and exchanged while the value of vertcoin was significantly smaller than it is now?

I presume that prior to creating this thread, you have meticulously analysed the blockchain, located all of the addresses that these coins went to, and then calculated the total trading and have come to the conclusion that None of these coins have been traded for, and that all coins were infact hoarded by one core individual? (Or perhaps you are accusing the devs of hoarding here, personally I wish they did, Vertcoin is amazing at the stage it currently is, but nope, I'm pretty sure that much like Bitcoin most of the very early adopters traded their coin away before it became anything of significant worth).

This is why I am calling this FUD, as its a partial story, with a nice looking graph.

Lets see the figures, graphs and proof first - that one or two people mined and currently hold this amount.

You may want to use this for reference:

bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-vertcoin-addresses.html

The top few addresses afaik have accumulated their coins more recently.

Yes, you can design a coin to be mined fast at the beginning. So you can indeed create an instamine. You can also prevent against it. They clearly did not prevent against it. I think that warrants a questioning of their motives.

Since it is only wise to hold large amounts of coin in multiple wallets, I wouldn't try to prove it in the way you suggest.

But you are correct in that I haven't done hours and hours of research against Vertcoin. I don't care that much.

[testigodehumanidad]

This is why I am calling this FUD, as its a partial story, with a nice looking graph.

Lets see the figures, graphs and proof first - that one or two people mined and currently hold this amount.

Let's see the figures and graphs, eh?

You can't reject the graphs I show because it is something you don't like and ask for more graphs that show something you do like.

[extraKrispy]

Does anybody have any VTC for sale? Looking to buy about 5 BTC worth of them.

[testigodehumanidad]

Does anybody have any VTC for sale? Looking to buy about 5 BTC worth of them.

Just go to Cryptsy, they have one of the top BTC markets according to my Crypsty dashboard. 64.5 BTC volume should set you up in no time.

[jparsley]

Pump and dump coins.