[ANN] ¤ DMD Diamond 3.0 | Scarce ¤ Valuable ¤ Secure | PoS 3.0 | Masternodes 65%

[cryptonit]

Coinmarketcap has not updated their link to the explorer with the new one. They should fix this.

please send them this feedback

[1714121351]

1714121351

[1714121351]

1714121351

[1714121351]

1714121351

[1714121351]

1714121351

[stoody]

hi team i mined .0038-- btc to the promotion project, that was a week worth of mining.

[crazyivan]

hi team i mined .0038-- btc to the promotion project, that was a week worth of mining.

What do you mine with?

[stoody]

i got 2 x 1.3mhs asic miners, they are called FURY miners from gaw miners

[pokeytex]

Coinmarketcap has not updated their link to the explorer with the new one. They should fix this.

please send them this feedback

@cryptonit - Did we ever get sorted out from the chinese bitcoin mining company that was away on chinese new year?  I don't recall seeing anything on that.  Please advise.  Thanks - pokeytex

[crazyivan]

One really needs to be a brain damaged idiot to dump coins 2 weeks before reward reduction??

I guess some people are made for losing money.

[cryptonit]

DMD Cloudmining Report February 2015:

3098 new investment
- reinvest
10333 earned DMD

------------------------------

all time stats:

29869   total invested
6647    total reinvested
64593   total earned DMD

-----------------------------

there no reinvest shares for February distributed because the payment didnt arrive from AMHASH1

over 20 thash we run at
https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=AMHASH1
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg10739094#msg10739094

there is nothing we can do beside waiting
amhash was considered in industry as one of most secure cloud mining companies
because it was a join venture of two companies which build and sell mininghardware (asicminer and rockminer)

as long as amhash dont pay we can stop reinvesting and keep payouts as we have now
but with the risc that they maybe never pay and we have constant loss of earning power because no reinvest resulting in a end of payout generation not far away

other path could be consider amhash as not existing until it come back (if it come back) and use from the leftover income sources bitcoins for reinvest

this way we can maybe save longterm earning power but reduce payouts significant

after this 6 months we had to analyze cloud setup i would like to change setting towards 50% reinvest from original 30%
to keep at least the long term earning power alive even if weaker

and to be able compensate such little catastrophes better

also i would stop creating free invest shares to keep investing for new people possible

what cloud investors think about this?

please shareholders post ur opinion as reply here

basical we have only two ways

1.) people say we cant change rules because there is a contract

and cloud will run as it does now weaker and weaker in payout until the end of operation

or

2.) we adapt rules as suggested (50% reinvest no creation of reinvest shares) have instant reduced payouts but a realistic chance to get this into a long term income source for investors



if u ask for my opinion i prefer lower payouts but a realistic chance to recover and have real long term payouts because of reinvest cycle runs better with 50%

if u own no shares at cloud please let shareholder express their opinion first
i want to read from the people which are affected primary please

thx for ur understanding

[shveicar]

I think that 50% of reinvesting a good idea. Given the current situation with the problems in some mining companies.
Soon to happen reduction awards POW block and we need to increase support for cloud mining.

[crazyivan]

Yes, I would definitely go for 50% reinvestment MINIMUM.

IMHO, the most important thing I would like to get from my DMD cloud investments is sustainability. I like knowing my investment is safe and it generates return for me every day.
With constantly increasing mining difficulty, 50% reinvestment is required and justified to preserve this sustainability.

I am for option no.2

[pokeytex]

@cryptonit - Did we ever get sorted out from the chinese bitcoin mining company that was away on chinese new year?  I don't recall seeing anything on that.  Please advise.  Thanks - pokeytex

no

there is still no reinvest shares for February distributed because the payment didnt arrive from AMHASH1

over 20 thash we run at
https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=AMHASH1
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg10739094#msg10739094

there is nothing we can do beside waiting
amhash was considered in industry as one of most secure cloud mining companies
because it was a join venture of two companies which build and sell mininghardware (asicminer and rockminer)

as long as amhash dont pay we can stop reinvesting and keep payouts as we have now
but with the risc that they maybe never pay and we have constant loss of earning power because no reinvest resulting in a end of payout generation not far away

other path could be consider amhash as not existing until it come back (if it come back) and use from the leftover income sources bitcoins for reinvest

this way we can maybe save longterm earning power but reduce payouts significant

after this 6 months we had to analyze cloud setup i would like to change setting towards 50% reinvest from original 30%
to keep at least the long term earning power alive even if weaker

and to be able compensate such little catastrophes better

also i would stop creating free invest shares to keep investing for new people possible

what cloud investors think about this?

basical we have only two ways

1.) people say we cant change rules because there is a contract

and cloud will run as it does now weaker and weaker in payout until the end of operation

or

2.) we adapt rules as suggested (50% reinvest no creation of reinvest shares) have instant reduced payouts but a realistic chance to get this into a long term income source for investors

if u ask for my opinion i prefer lower payouts but a realistic chance to recover and have real long term payouts because of reinvest cycle runs better with 50%

if u own no shares at cloud please let shareholder express their opinion first
i want to read from the people which are affected primary please

thx for ur understanding

I am unsure since I don't have all of the facts.  I invested in cloud mining primarily to have the constant flow of DMD's without having to monitor a rig setup to get them.  I am in the middle of selling off all of my mining equipment which will make me completely dependent on cloud mining services.  However I am getting uneasy in doing so because it seems like there is no recourse for these contracts.  You either take them or lose them. (It seems).  Correct me if I am wrong but I think we have now lost (2) cloud mining contracts plus the paycoin fiasco - correct?  What does this represent in cloud mining investment lost?  How much USD does it represent?  How many additional cloud mining contracts do we have?  Are the other contracts paying regularly and are they appearing solvent?  If so and you think the remaining contracts are secure then I am ok with 50% to reinvesting and 50% returned to the miners.  If they are wishy washy and you are unsure that they are going to keep paying I say divert our reinvest shares to some other tool to help implement support on the buy side.

- pokeytex

[cryptonit]

I am unsure since I don't have all of the facts.  I invested in cloud mining primarily to have the constant flow of DMD's without having to monitor a rig setup to get them.  I am in the middle of selling off all of my mining equipment which will make me completely dependent on cloud mining services.  However I am getting uneasy in doing so because it seems like there is no recourse for these contracts.  You either take them or lose them. (It seems).  Correct me if I am wrong but I think we have now lost (2) cloud mining contracts plus the paycoin fiasco - correct?  What does this represent in cloud mining investment lost?  How much USD does it represent?  How many additional cloud mining contracts do we have?  Are the other contracts paying regularly and are they appearing solvent?  If so and you think the remaining contracts are secure then I am ok with 50% to reinvesting and 50% returned to the miners.  If they are wishy washy and you are unsure that they are going to keep paying I say divert our reinvest shares to some other tool to help implement support on the buy side.

- pokeytex

reinvest isnt going into the payout source that generate them
reinvest is always going in the solution that we consider the actual best existing one

best is selected by us by analyze profit stability and security and split invest over multiple companies

i want to make clear to everyone here i still hold around 50% of all cloud shares (and i filled 50% of reactor with my own coins as contribution)
i work for it as everyone of u would work for his 15000$ investment
and i same as any other core team member bought it same rules as everyone else
1$ btc value = 1 share

im not gambling with ur money at your risc
i try to find the best solution amhash in december sure anyone u asked would have agreed is one of the best solutions

if i count all core team members and peopel i did already talk about this topic together i have already 75% of shareholders supporting the change

still i want to discuss it public so everyone also understand the reasons

with crazyivan now as core team member who is  also a experienced cloud investor we  have another expert which support analyze investment strategies

additional reactor was created to give cloud a backbone that compensate hard times and it will support payouts each month with at least 2000 DMD

while reactor fill the gap i strong suggest u all follow the suggested changes so we can get this cloud operation back on track to be long term supporting our DMD investments and as additional DMD imcome source

POS² (prove of stake + prove of shares)

[Tyke]

Diamond is automatically through to the second edition https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=985422.0

[cryptonit]

Diamond is automatically through to the second edition https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=985422.0

we are always good for a story  

in the end the diamond will shine bright everywhere

[crazyivan]

Personally, I still do not consider Amhash as a lost cause. Based on info from Asicminer, one of two companies behind Amhash, they are considering options to compensate their investors. Will this actually happen and when, we should know during the next week or so.

So, business as usual, just we need to consider reinvesting more to be able to provide sustainability of the cloud. I do it this way for all of my personal cloud mining investments and this is a very prudent thing to do.
Actually, let me correct that previous line, it is THE ONLY thing to do having in mind sustainability of the cloud.

[stoody]

what ever works cryptonit .. im ok with 50% reinvested... do you think a new contract should be reissued?? i dont know if its mentioned how much % where to be payed

[cryptonit]

what ever works cryptonit .. im ok with 50% reinvested... do you think a new contract should be reissued?? i dont know if its mentioned how much % where to be payed

we would update terms of service document and send this to all shareholder as update

[RaginglikeaBoss]

I have to say that I'm not okay with a change in the reinvestment amount.  Simply stated in the infamous phrase "a contract, is a contract, is a contract."

Reinvesting more during a period of loss is akin to doubling down on the blackjack table after a major loss.  It's an unnecessary risk in my opinion and it defeats the purpose of the so often advertised "DMD cloud mining."

I hate to play devil's advocate, but this is truly how I feel -- especially considering we have a standing contract in place.

[popshot]

I'm opting for option two.

2.) we adapt rules as suggested (50% reinvest no creation of reinvest shares) have instant reduced payouts but a realistic chance to get this into a long term income source for investors

As someone has already mentioned, keeping operation going in this adjusted mode will ensure the cloud will be in better shape after the crisis than if it carried on without it.  

[cryptonit]

Reinvesting more during a period of loss is akin to doubling down on the blackjack table after a major loss.  It's an unnecessary risk in my opinion and it defeats the purpose of the so often advertised "DMD cloud mining."

we started the project and designed the contract ruleset in august 2014

at a time when cloudmining at all companies was in a much better state then now

so back then the 30% reinvest was a good plan and im no lawyer so i didnt find the right words in contract that would make the reinvest part flexible and adapt to the state of cloudmining business


environment changed in 2015

i full understand ur point about contract

there would be option 3 and i think noone love that one

that we create a DMD CLoudmining V2 with new ruleset
and let DMD Cloudmining V1 run at old ruleset

this would lead clear in a state where only V2 would attract new investors

majority of V1 shareowners would be against such a solution i guess

im open for suggestions

but its not double or nothing as u said with ur try to compare with black jack

its simple mathematic

under actual cloudmining conditions with investments only in serious companies u wont be able conserve earning power with only 30% reinvest

if we change to 50% and things get better what would happen?

that our reinvest not only counter loss of earning power but additional increase it

i dont think that would be a bad sideffect

[RaginglikeaBoss]

I simply don't understand why reinvesting 50% rather than 30% will suddenly make cloud mining profitable.  Maybe I'm ignorant but following current and past cloud mining analytics appears to me to be an unprofitable venture.  I know I personally would not deposit anymore BTC into major cloud mining websites for own BTC wallet, so I certainly wouldn't consider it a good idea for DMD.

im no lawyer so i didnt find the right words in contract that would make the reinvest part flexible and adapt to the state of cloudmining business

Yes, this is unfortunate.  But that is why you're asking us to voice our opinions, which is a good idea.  The only way to change the contract would be for both parties to decide on the change mutually.

We all have different opinions so discussion is good.  My suggestion is to stick to the contract to avoid potential legal action by angry cloud share holders.