|
popshot (OP)
|
 |
January 30, 2015, 09:55:40 PM |
|
So don't send DMD to reactor if not already sent?
no, please don't send your coins, the rest of the coins will be returned and losses reimbursed. I can imagine it looks strange to change so suddenly, but this is sometimes how splitting work works out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES I HA(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻ TABLES I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 30, 2015, 09:57:43 PM |
|
So when do we see our coins returned with 5% interest on top?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argon18
|
|
January 30, 2015, 09:57:49 PM |
|
if reactor in the form its designed split community that much
we freeze project and research possibilities to launch it decentralized
or even cancel it at all
until we analyzed possible impact on reactor project and finish talks with possible partners
we would have to freeze reactor rollout anyway
so "glow blue might come late or never"
but the new business proposal we are analyzing might be something better
i full understand people will say we created a fairy tale about a new project
to defend our freeze of reactor project
Wow , Yes, that is what it looks like. Looks like a crack in the wall. LOL.  |
|
|
|
cryptonit
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1053
bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:03:08 PM |
|
So when do we see our coins returned with 5% interest on top?
i will start sending now i wont use reactor wallet because i have no access for security reasons people who got their coins back please confirm here in thread so its visible that there is nothing shady going on |
|
|
|
|
popshot (OP)
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:03:32 PM |
|
So when do we see our coins returned with 5% interest on top?
as soon as possible but it's done when it's done |
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:18:30 PM |
|
Coins received with interest  To: dRANuqn2Kj26MQQbEwEu4zUBsKQb62hJzj (own address, label: Cloudmine DMD) Credit: 1050.00 DMD Net amount: +1050.00 DMD Transaction ID: 3071d8f1121fcf68f6877ccc0d781b5e342c7bacf8ed00718e31688bdb7457c2 Thanks for quick response, hope new secret weapon will offer comparable profitability to feed the greed |
|
|
|
|
pokeytex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1504
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:29:05 PM |
|
Coins received with interest.
Status: 6 confirmations
Date: 1/30/2015 17:20
From: unknown
To: darrnyqFMDJ13LKbgkkWMbhh7RA3rK5SyF (own address, label: Diamond Cloud Mining)
Credit: 1575.00 DMD
Net amount: +1575.00 DMD
Transaction ID: c3f0b4c321b50ca63787794268229f1ff2a3b2a8be38a5c46c953bfcc22979b5
I liked the reactor idea! I hope the next one makes more people happy. I am willing to fill more reactor slots if no others are interested!
|
|
|
|
Sneaking
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 47
Merit: 0
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:38:21 PM
Last edit: January 31, 2015, 01:18:57 AM by Sneaking |
|
Decentralized reactor:
Reactor service description as following.
Installation of wallet proram:
Confirmation tick to run reactor service at background and mentioned at licence eula file text.
Would only start up if wallet have required amount of dmd.
Reactor service would have to be lighter version of wallet with no interface at all. Should not hinder online fps games or net streaming etc or else end users just get rid of it.
Wallet interface would include drag and drop reactor slots. You would fill Your required amount of diamonds to each slot. Diamonds would lock into slot with confirmation.
If You want to intagrate reactor slots to Your cloudmining or multipool a simple confirmation bit from cloudmining or from multipool to reactor service would enable slots. Why not even open more slots to reactor from more supportting? Or why not to make it so that initial diamond wallet owner over required amount of diamonds gets 1 slot. More slots could be aquired through investing to diamond or its partner services.
That required initial amount of diamonds for first reactor would maby be globally adjusted by reactor service. (Demand and supply)
Decentralization takes away unneccessary manual work from sending emails and confirming each user and creates automated system that end user can choose to use if thay wish.
No trust issues for anyone. Feel free to comment.
-Sneaking
|
|
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:42:18 PM |
|
my last 600 which was still sitting in personal wallet staked just before announce of reactor dissolution ... all my coins now 0 days age but that's OK I made 7.5 on staking (and was going to invest) and 50 for reactor interest. Not bad  |
|
|
|
|
|
chilo
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:46:33 PM |
|
my last 600 which was still sitting in personal wallet staked just before announce of reactor dissolution ... all my coins now 0 days age but that's OK I made 7.5 on staking (and was going to invest) and 50 for reactor interest. Not bad I am glad you had a win on that gamble utahjohn, even if it turned out different to what was expected! |
|
|
|
Reggie0
Member
Offline
Activity: 107
Merit: 13
|
|
January 30, 2015, 10:48:55 PM |
|
if reactor in the form its designed split community that much
we freeze project and research possibilities to launch it decentralized
or even cancel it at all
...
I accept it is hard decision for you. I don't support the reactor, but I will support you anyway, even if you choose to start the reactor. I'm glad we have flexible devs. |
|
|
|
|
|
mitache365
|
|
January 30, 2015, 11:01:08 PM |
|
and 5% on top as replacement for lost coin age
respect! |
BTC
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 30, 2015, 11:01:32 PM |
|
my last 600 which was still sitting in personal wallet staked just before announce of reactor dissolution ... all my coins now 0 days age but that's OK I made 7.5 on staking (and was going to invest) and 50 for reactor interest. Not bad I am glad you had a win on that gamble utahjohn, even if it turned out different to what was expected! Good opportunity to consolidate into single pile Cost me 0.002 to send to another wallet and back, now all in single coin pile |
|
|
|
|
cryptonit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1053
bit.diamonds | uNiq.diamonds
|
|
January 30, 2015, 11:11:12 PM |
|
all investments returned as said before not visible on reactor wallet because used coins from somewhere else
we will empty reactor wallet later when we know more about future plans
and if it is clear that this kind of idea is for sure not returning
maybe we even go for reactor with normal pos rate and only foundation member coins in it
the idea of secure network with a 24/7 big wallet was sure a good one
|
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 30, 2015, 11:57:57 PM |
|
all investments returned as said before not visible on reactor wallet because used coins from somewhere else
we will empty reactor wallet later when we know more about future plans
and if it is clear that this kind of idea is for sure not returning
maybe we even go for reactor with normal pos rate and only foundation member coins in it
the idea of secure network with a 24/7 big wallet was sure a good one
why not put foundation funds into reactor wallet, stake them normal 1x rate (50% annual) and give rewards to cloudmining? |
|
|
|
|
Boffin1818
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
January 31, 2015, 12:11:03 AM |
|
Have not received refund from reactor investment Cryptonit check email please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argon18
|
|
January 31, 2015, 03:11:57 AM |
|
the idea of secure network with a 24/7 big wallet was sure a good one
If you need POS to be more secure, change your POS so the coin only gains interest for staking when online, no coin age accumulates if the wallet is offline, this will keep more wallets online. If that is still not enough, look at dropping the POS completely and merge mining with Litecoin & Dogecoin or pure Groestl mining to solve the security issues. This coin seems to have a lot more miners than minters. Other things to consider, merged mining with Groestlcoin, or change to new feathercoin protocol and merge mined with them. Plenty of options for diamond. |
|
|
|
|
popshot (OP)
|
|
January 31, 2015, 03:15:40 AM |
|
the idea of secure network with a 24/7 big wallet was sure a good one
If you need POS to be more secure, change your POS so the coin only gains interest for staking when online, no coin age accumulates if the wallet is offline, this will keep more wallets online. If that is still not enough, look at dropping the POS completely and merge mining with Litecoin & Dogecoin or pure Groestl mining to solve the security issues. This coin seems to have a lot more miners than minters. Other things to consider, merged mining with Groestlcoin, or change to new feathercoin protocol and merge mined with them. Plenty of options for diamond. Yes, Proof of Action is one of the things we've been thinking about. Just like the other ones you've mentioned. We still do have some time. |
|
|
|
|
utahjohn
|
|
January 31, 2015, 03:24:13 AM |
|
This coin seems to have a lot more miners than minters. Not for all that much longer, when PoW reward reduction occurs most if not all mine-to-dump miners will leave ... More frequent staking as suggested is a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
big_coins
|
|
January 31, 2015, 03:47:23 AM |
|
Thanks for putting brakes on this, brave decision and I applaud you both.
For the record I do not think the reactor idea was a bad one at all as long as every DMD user has it on their wallet. If only a special user gets it we all see the obvious issue.
I look at it as each user having a 'high interest account' with every wallet for long term staking. This is a good idea.
Rather than the 4x interest make it flexible based on coins needed, just like difficulty so it can be adjusted on the fly to generate as many coins as the network needs.
Again, thanks for pausing and reflecting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
