Thank you for asking these questions and vetting this out for the community. I for one now respect what you are doing as a simple investor and will be curious as to the response.
Do you want to know what the official Silkcoin response is to my concerns about the origin of this project, it's errors and omissions, versus the stated aims and bold ambitions?
The official Silkcoin response was to send me a pm and ask that, while they understood my concerns were real and not FUD, would I be so kind as to stop asking these awkward questions! 'Rob' on the 'Silkcoin' account, stated that, due to the current market conditions, it wasn't the 'best conversation' to be having right now.
I disagree, it is *exactly* because of the market conditions that we *should* be having this conversation right now and I don't appreciate being asked to keep quiet solely because the coin devs prefer fanboy coin-praising to hype the market, instead of a mature discussion about reasonable concerns which, were they to be properly addressed, would actually serve to strengthen the market's faith in this coin in the medium and long term, instead of pandering to the whims of the short-term gamblers who have bet their rent money on your promises.
On the one hand you want to overlook and downplay this claimed 'simple' error on the basis that one of your team didn't understand Base58 encoding and, after consulting the Check_encoding page, mistakenly believed '25' would equate to 'S' in the address format specification. Well that would be a reasonable claim to make if it wasn't for something you then went on to confirm, namely, that the source code is from Blackcoin, something we already knew.
Mistakes happen, and as I told you even when we saw it we never considered it as a flaw. . . .Anyway is it really worth talking about it for hours? . . . we had a lot of other issues to deal with, as an example testing if we could integrate the eco-system in the BC code since it was planned from start.
You see, the problem I have is that you knew you were using the Blackcoin source code to create this coin, the wallet and plan the 'Ecosystem' you intend to implement, but then you say that one programmer made a mistake when he consulted
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Base58Check_encoding for working out how to format the coin address with a leading 'S'.
Surely, on the basis you were working from the BC source, the conclusion he came to would have resulted in him leaving it as it already was, leading with a 'B' and, therefore, clearly not the correct coding for an 'S'?
Now you can complain again that you'd rather I not ask these awkward questions but, let's not forget, you're the coin development team that started with a bang, something you called 'Shock and Awe' if I recall correctly, promising to rock everybody's world over this coin. But, when asked to explain something rather mundane but also a good indicator of your team's quality standards when it comes to testing and implementation, you either have fanboys hurling abuse and trying to bury the question, or you mistakenly think that a couple of pm's to me asking that I leave the subject alone, for the sake of the coin's value, is the appropriate response.
Where do you think that value comes from? You? Your team? No, the value comes from the very people who buy your coin by the thousand on the basis that you are claiming you are capable of delivering what you promise. Trouble is, when you start asking people to change the subject, instead of actually engaging in the discussion and resolving it through reasoned and open conversation, thereby assuring that it can't be used as FUD by extortionists and market manipulators, it makes you equally as guilty of dishonesty as the extortionists and market manipulators.
You and your team have extremely bold intentions on where you plan to take this coin. You need to be able to demonstrate that the, extremely high level of quality testing and implementation needed for this vision can actually be achieved and maintained throughout.
Something you didn't start off being able to accomplish, it would seem.
