[ANN][XC] >> Mandatory Update to new Wallet - The first POS X11 anonymous wallet

[kpierce77]

Ya -- I really cannot stress enough how necessary it is to reduce total supply and PoW phase.  Can't sleep because my mind is all worked up about this.  I want what is best for the longevity of this coin.  Just think about it:

If things remain unchanged -- what group will be holding the majority control on the price once anon features go live?  Will it be the miners (selling the price down) or investors  (buying the price up)?  It will be 100% be the miners holding majority control --> because 75% of all coins will be minted in 2 months (this is way too many coins way too soon) especially considering that XC's biggest selling point was already delivered two months ago (by that point in time).

Again, this would be somewhat of a different story if anon features released near or at the end of PoW phase (because the expectation would help sustain buyer confidence).  But it is not.  Anon feature is the "hot thing" right now, and the hype around it will only be suppressed as 25 million more XC flood the market in two months.  People buy on news and sell on fact.  Once anon feature (the news) is released, XC will have an extremely hard time increasing in value in light of 25m (75%) of the supply being minted and thrown into the market.  Two months of sell offs is a long time and will assuredly decrease buyer confidence.  

Not to mention, 2 months down the road, there will surely be another coin to be 100% PoS with anon features before we reach our 100% PoS stage.  It is crucial that XC becomes 100% PoS with anon feature before any other coin.

XC needs to reduce both total supply and PoW phase to help ensure healthy / constant buy pressure.  DRK reduced their block reward (and probably would have done more, had they been PoS), because they knew this move was necessary as they drew nearer to implementing darksend.  DRK team is really genius when it comes to creating market demand (for this reason and their requiring of 10,000 DRK taken off the market for each masternode).

This is exactly correct as veritasBS said:

Let me walk you through what will happen if the coin specs stay how they are currently:
1) There will be a big run in price when this PoS coin is the first to release the wallet.
2) We will get to a market cap of say 10 million.
3) There will be a fast decline in price but because this IS a coin with a quality dev and features, it will level off to some where around 6 million market cap.
4) Then 25 million more coins will come flooding in to the market over next 100 days. The price per coin will start a slow decline to 1/5 of where it was when it settled after the run.
5)The investors will only take so much loss and jump ship somewhere in the decline.
6) By the time PoW ends, you have many coins on the market with the EXACT same features so you no longer have an advantage.

The opportunity is NOW to make this a lasting coin. Use the advantage the dev has built to  make this the premier anon coin...anything else is poor management.


My Proposal:
10m coins (or less) and let PoW continue for another 1-2 weeks (1 is best) max with reduced block rewards.  

This will help allow for market cap growth, will help ensure XC is the first 100% PoS coin with anon tech, and will give time for an XC multipool to be set up and launched immediately when PoW ends.

Either this, or extend the PoW mining period years into the future with greatly reduced block rewards.  I think this is better than changing nothing (I still think that the first 100% PoS anon featured coin is this coins biggest selling point).  But if it remains the same --> yes, this coin will still be successful (if anon releases), but all I see is unnecessary value suppression for the future of this coin.

So true, I am sending this comment to the BTC devs immediately in hopes they cut off PoW supply and shift to PoS immediately.

If a coin has true value, it will rise.  End of story.  If the entire DRK rise is due to devs "creating market demand" as you put it (others would call it market manipulation, potato, potatoe), then the true value of DRK is not .025 BTC.

If alts need to resort to these types of tactics then maybe ::gasp:: the true value of virtually all alt coins is 0?

Yes, idiots buy the brand new coin to hit the market when the supply is low, and then, surprise surprise, price drops because they do not spend 2 minutes doing the math to figure out this coin is still in a stage of astronomical inflation.  That is an example of an unsavvy investor, not a poorly designed coin.

And what would be so wrong with miners controlling 75% of all the XC?  They invest money into the mining equipment, electricity, time, and ya know, keep the network of a PoW coin alive.

Miners mine the coins, investors buy them from the miners.  That's how it works.  If miners see no value in the alts they are mining, well yeah, they are gonna dump for BTC.  If there is value in the coin, they will mine and hold.  Why is it that miners getting more XC bothers you so much?  Could it be because your share of XC will be diluted, and the market won't be able to be controlled by a small group of market manipulators?

Maybe you are right though, it is true that a coin will rise faster and higher with a quick mining period to put the coins in the hands of as few people as possible.  It will rise as far as those manipulating the market will allow it to.  Until the giant red candle hits.  Hold on......lemme check CINNI price really quick.  YIKES!  Order books looking sickly.  Ya must have dumped at 38k satoshis huh?  Why didn't you apply your genius to "create market demand" for CINNI?  Oh, the market demand will be created with CINNI's innovative encrypted messaging system right?  I saw the little pictogram on twitter, it looks like something I would scrawl on a napkin to explain public key encryption to a 5 year old.  Innovation!

wow ur an asshole sorry but you just are..

I'm an asshole, or I'm the only one here telling it like it is.  Again, potato, potatoe.

He is actually right. He is not an asshole he is just telling how it is. Why should the dev change coin specs, just because some unexperienced people that call themseves "investors" did not do their homework and have unrealistic expectations?
What is going to happen when the coin bubbles after reducing pow? Reduce it again to keep the price at this level?

And finally look at all these 100% ipo coins that hit the market last weeks. They just bubbled ... and entered freefall mode after that.

That's just how the altcoingame is. You can make insane profits but you can also burn all your btc.

If the dev is commited and does good work the coin will be able to withstand the mining pressure and/or recover from big dumps. If it doesn't so be it!

+1

I think everyone should back off and let the dev work on the wallet. He created this coin so he shouldn't feel pressure to change any specs.

Thanks to both of you.  Good to see some back up.

I don't know if the dev is legit, or if this anonymous wallet will work or is real, but for some reason I am drawing a line in the sand on this one.  These incessant pump and dumps need to stop, or slow down at least.  Alt-coins are a complete and utter joke right now.

+1000000000  I couldn't agree more with this guy ^^^^^^

[1714705773]

1714705773

[1714705773]

1714705773

[1714705773]

1714705773

[1714705773]

1714705773

[kerhso]

hope everybody has wallet in stake mode.. I Noticed yesterday we didn't have very many POS blocks..

Whether  also reduces the PoW Blocks?

[Kenta]

We're finding blocks now at Minep.it , but we need more miners. Please join!


https://www.minep.it/pool/xc/

[Alisho]

hope everybody has wallet in stake mode.. I Noticed yesterday we didn't have very many POS blocks..

Ok I'm going to put my coins in my wallet Do I have to let the wallet open all the time??!

[evtrmm]

Ya -- I really cannot stress enough how necessary it is to reduce total supply and PoW phase.  Can't sleep because my mind is all worked up about this.  I want what is best for the longevity of this coin.  Just think about it:

If things remain unchanged -- what group will be holding the majority control on the price once anon features go live?  Will it be the miners (selling the price down) or investors  (buying the price up)?  It will be 100% be the miners holding majority control --> because 75% of all coins will be minted in 2 months (this is way too many coins way too soon) especially considering that XC's biggest selling point was already delivered two months ago (by that point in time).

Again, this would be somewhat of a different story if anon features released near or at the end of PoW phase (because the expectation would help sustain buyer confidence).  But it is not.  Anon feature is the "hot thing" right now, and the hype around it will only be suppressed as 25 million more XC flood the market in two months.  People buy on news and sell on fact.  Once anon feature (the news) is released, XC will have an extremely hard time increasing in value in light of 25m (75%) of the supply being minted and thrown into the market.  Two months of sell offs is a long time and will assuredly decrease buyer confidence.  

Not to mention, 2 months down the road, there will surely be another coin to be 100% PoS with anon features before we reach our 100% PoS stage.  It is crucial that XC becomes 100% PoS with anon feature before any other coin.

XC needs to reduce both total supply and PoW phase to help ensure healthy / constant buy pressure.  DRK reduced their block reward (and probably would have done more, had they been PoS), because they knew this move was necessary as they drew nearer to implementing darksend.  DRK team is really genius when it comes to creating market demand (for this reason and their requiring of 10,000 DRK taken off the market for each masternode).

This is exactly correct as veritasBS said:

Let me walk you through what will happen if the coin specs stay how they are currently:
1) There will be a big run in price when this PoS coin is the first to release the wallet.
2) We will get to a market cap of say 10 million.
3) There will be a fast decline in price but because this IS a coin with a quality dev and features, it will level off to some where around 6 million market cap.
4) Then 25 million more coins will come flooding in to the market over next 100 days. The price per coin will start a slow decline to 1/5 of where it was when it settled after the run.
5)The investors will only take so much loss and jump ship somewhere in the decline.
6) By the time PoW ends, you have many coins on the market with the EXACT same features so you no longer have an advantage.

The opportunity is NOW to make this a lasting coin. Use the advantage the dev has built to  make this the premier anon coin...anything else is poor management.


My Proposal:
10m coins (or less) and let PoW continue for another 1-2 weeks (1 is best) max with reduced block rewards.  

This will help allow for market cap growth, will help ensure XC is the first 100% PoS coin with anon tech, and will give time for an XC multipool to be set up and launched immediately when PoW ends.

Either this, or extend the PoW mining period years into the future with greatly reduced block rewards.  I think this is better than changing nothing (I still think that the first 100% PoS anon featured coin is this coins biggest selling point).  But if it remains the same --> yes, this coin will still be successful (if anon releases), but all I see is unnecessary value suppression for the future of this coin.

So true, I am sending this comment to the BTC devs immediately in hopes they cut off PoW supply and shift to PoS immediately.

If a coin has true value, it will rise.  End of story.  If the entire DRK rise is due to devs "creating market demand" as you put it (others would call it market manipulation, potato, potatoe), then the true value of DRK is not .025 BTC.

If alts need to resort to these types of tactics then maybe ::gasp:: the true value of virtually all alt coins is 0?

Yes, idiots buy the brand new coin to hit the market when the supply is low, and then, surprise surprise, price drops because they do not spend 2 minutes doing the math to figure out this coin is still in a stage of astronomical inflation.  That is an example of an unsavvy investor, not a poorly designed coin.

And what would be so wrong with miners controlling 75% of all the XC?  They invest money into the mining equipment, electricity, time, and ya know, keep the network of a PoW coin alive.

Miners mine the coins, investors buy them from the miners.  That's how it works.  If miners see no value in the alts they are mining, well yeah, they are gonna dump for BTC.  If there is value in the coin, they will mine and hold.  Why is it that miners getting more XC bothers you so much?  Could it be because your share of XC will be diluted, and the market won't be able to be controlled by a small group of market manipulators?

Maybe you are right though, it is true that a coin will rise faster and higher with a quick mining period to put the coins in the hands of as few people as possible.  It will rise as far as those manipulating the market will allow it to.  Until the giant red candle hits.  Hold on......lemme check CINNI price really quick.  YIKES!  Order books looking sickly.  Ya must have dumped at 38k satoshis huh?  Why didn't you apply your genius to "create market demand" for CINNI?  Oh, the market demand will be created with CINNI's innovative encrypted messaging system right?  I saw the little pictogram on twitter, it looks like something I would scrawl on a napkin to explain public key encryption to a 5 year old.  Innovation!

wow ur an asshole sorry but you just are..

I'm an asshole, or I'm the only one here telling it like it is.  Again, potato, potatoe.

He is actually right. He is not an asshole he is just telling how it is. Why should the dev change coin specs, just because some unexperienced people that call themseves "investors" did not do their homework and have unrealistic expectations?
What is going to happen when the coin bubbles after reducing pow? Reduce it again to keep the price at this level?

And finally look at all these 100% ipo coins that hit the market last weeks. They just bubbled ... and entered freefall mode after that.

That's just how the altcoingame is. You can make insane profits but you can also burn all your btc.

If the dev is commited and does good work the coin will be able to withstand the mining pressure and/or recover from big dumps. If it doesn't so be it!

+1

I think everyone should back off and let the dev work on the wallet. He created this coin so he shouldn't feel pressure to change any specs.

Thanks to both of you.  Good to see some back up.

I don't know if the dev is legit, or if this anonymous wallet will work or is real, but for some reason I am drawing a line in the sand on this one.  These incessant pump and dumps need to stop, or slow down at least.  Alt-coins are a complete and utter joke right now.

+1000000000  I couldn't agree more with this guy ^^^^^^

I also support you.  I have been on this coin since day 1 mining, had a role in help getting it to market (see my twitter @BAMMining), and have used market volatility to profit while accumulating more coins.  So that being said, I would benefit substantially from a reduction in supply.

The right way to reduce the number of coins and do it in a truly fair manner would be to decrease the coins held in wallets by the same ratio as the total supply.  If this were possible, then I would be on board with it.  But it appears to me that the whole motive and desire behind the proposed coin reduction is profit.  Profit for "Investors" and "miners" who already hold the coin.  

Am I opposed to profit? Not at all.  Am I opposed to greed? Hell yes.  In the end, the true value of this coin will be dictated by performance and not by supply.

[philipvdlinde]

Ya -- I really cannot stress enough how necessary it is to reduce total supply and PoW phase.  Can't sleep because my mind is all worked up about this.  I want what is best for the longevity of this coin.  Just think about it:

If things remain unchanged -- what group will be holding the majority control on the price once anon features go live?  Will it be the miners (selling the price down) or investors  (buying the price up)?  It will be 100% be the miners holding majority control --> because 75% of all coins will be minted in 2 months (this is way too many coins way too soon) especially considering that XC's biggest selling point was already delivered two months ago (by that point in time).

Again, this would be somewhat of a different story if anon features released near or at the end of PoW phase (because the expectation would help sustain buyer confidence).  But it is not.  Anon feature is the "hot thing" right now, and the hype around it will only be suppressed as 25 million more XC flood the market in two months.  People buy on news and sell on fact.  Once anon feature (the news) is released, XC will have an extremely hard time increasing in value in light of 25m (75%) of the supply being minted and thrown into the market.  Two months of sell offs is a long time and will assuredly decrease buyer confidence.  

Not to mention, 2 months down the road, there will surely be another coin to be 100% PoS with anon features before we reach our 100% PoS stage.  It is crucial that XC becomes 100% PoS with anon feature before any other coin.

XC needs to reduce both total supply and PoW phase to help ensure healthy / constant buy pressure.  DRK reduced their block reward (and probably would have done more, had they been PoS), because they knew this move was necessary as they drew nearer to implementing darksend.  DRK team is really genius when it comes to creating market demand (for this reason and their requiring of 10,000 DRK taken off the market for each masternode).

This is exactly correct as veritasBS said:

Let me walk you through what will happen if the coin specs stay how they are currently:
1) There will be a big run in price when this PoS coin is the first to release the wallet.
2) We will get to a market cap of say 10 million.
3) There will be a fast decline in price but because this IS a coin with a quality dev and features, it will level off to some where around 6 million market cap.
4) Then 25 million more coins will come flooding in to the market over next 100 days. The price per coin will start a slow decline to 1/5 of where it was when it settled after the run.
5)The investors will only take so much loss and jump ship somewhere in the decline.
6) By the time PoW ends, you have many coins on the market with the EXACT same features so you no longer have an advantage.

The opportunity is NOW to make this a lasting coin. Use the advantage the dev has built to  make this the premier anon coin...anything else is poor management.


My Proposal:
10m coins (or less) and let PoW continue for another 1-2 weeks (1 is best) max with reduced block rewards.  

This will help allow for market cap growth, will help ensure XC is the first 100% PoS coin with anon tech, and will give time for an XC multipool to be set up and launched immediately when PoW ends.

Either this, or extend the PoW mining period years into the future with greatly reduced block rewards.  I think this is better than changing nothing (I still think that the first 100% PoS anon featured coin is this coins biggest selling point).  But if it remains the same --> yes, this coin will still be successful (if anon releases), but all I see is unnecessary value suppression for the future of this coin.

So true, I am sending this comment to the BTC devs immediately in hopes they cut off PoW supply and shift to PoS immediately.

If a coin has true value, it will rise.  End of story.  If the entire DRK rise is due to devs "creating market demand" as you put it (others would call it market manipulation, potato, potatoe), then the true value of DRK is not .025 BTC.

If alts need to resort to these types of tactics then maybe ::gasp:: the true value of virtually all alt coins is 0?

Yes, idiots buy the brand new coin to hit the market when the supply is low, and then, surprise surprise, price drops because they do not spend 2 minutes doing the math to figure out this coin is still in a stage of astronomical inflation.  That is an example of an unsavvy investor, not a poorly designed coin.

And what would be so wrong with miners controlling 75% of all the XC?  They invest money into the mining equipment, electricity, time, and ya know, keep the network of a PoW coin alive.

Miners mine the coins, investors buy them from the miners.  That's how it works.  If miners see no value in the alts they are mining, well yeah, they are gonna dump for BTC.  If there is value in the coin, they will mine and hold.  Why is it that miners getting more XC bothers you so much?  Could it be because your share of XC will be diluted, and the market won't be able to be controlled by a small group of market manipulators?

Maybe you are right though, it is true that a coin will rise faster and higher with a quick mining period to put the coins in the hands of as few people as possible.  It will rise as far as those manipulating the market will allow it to.  Until the giant red candle hits.  Hold on......lemme check CINNI price really quick.  YIKES!  Order books looking sickly.  Ya must have dumped at 38k satoshis huh?  Why didn't you apply your genius to "create market demand" for CINNI?  Oh, the market demand will be created with CINNI's innovative encrypted messaging system right?  I saw the little pictogram on twitter, it looks like something I would scrawl on a napkin to explain public key encryption to a 5 year old.  Innovation!

wow ur an asshole sorry but you just are..

I'm an asshole, or I'm the only one here telling it like it is.  Again, potato, potatoe.

He is actually right. He is not an asshole he is just telling how it is. Why should the dev change coin specs, just because some unexperienced people that call themseves "investors" did not do their homework and have unrealistic expectations?
What is going to happen when the coin bubbles after reducing pow? Reduce it again to keep the price at this level?

And finally look at all these 100% ipo coins that hit the market last weeks. They just bubbled ... and entered freefall mode after that.

That's just how the altcoingame is. You can make insane profits but you can also burn all your btc.

If the dev is commited and does good work the coin will be able to withstand the mining pressure and/or recover from big dumps. If it doesn't so be it!

+1

I think everyone should back off and let the dev work on the wallet. He created this coin so he shouldn't feel pressure to change any specs.

Thanks to both of you.  Good to see some back up.

I don't know if the dev is legit, or if this anonymous wallet will work or is real, but for some reason I am drawing a line in the sand on this one.  These incessant pump and dumps need to stop, or slow down at least.  Alt-coins are a complete and utter joke right now.

+1000000000  I couldn't agree more with this guy ^^^^^^

I also support you.  I have been on this coin since day 1 mining, had a role in help getting it to market (see my twitter @BAMMining), and have used market volatility to profit while accumulating more coins.  So that being said, I would benefit substantially from a reduction in supply.

The right way to reduce the number of coins and do it in a truly fair manner would be to decrease the coins held in wallets by the same ratio as the total supply.  If this were possible, then I would be on board with it.  But it appears to me that the whole motive and desire behind the proposed coin reduction is profit.  Profit for "Investors" and "miners" who already hold the coin.  

Am I opposed to profit? Not at all.  Am I opposed to greed? Hell yes.  In the end, the true value of this coin will be dictated by performance and not by supply.

I fully agree, we should try to generate pos block so that POW will finish faster, and the coin becomes less attractive for multipools to mine.

[dadon]

i'm not greedy so stop saying it..

[HHector]

 Guys, what is the block reward of XC?

[philipvdlinde]

 Guys, what is the block reward of XC?

333 If I recall correctly.

[Kenta]

 Guys, what is the block reward of XC?

Looks like 333 the last few days

[battbot]

I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code.  All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then?  I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.

Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time.  If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration.  And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees.  All of this should be the same for any alt coin.  

Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful.  I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).

Again:  The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered.  This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.

Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards.  One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.

[atcsecure]

I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS.  The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...  


so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking

[atcsecure]

I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code.  All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then?  I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.

Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious?  This is an argument?  Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time.  If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration.  And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees.  All of this is the same for any alt coin. 

Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful.  I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).

Again:  The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered.  This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.

Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards.  One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.

We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks...  but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...

[thewarners777]

In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?

[BrewCrewFan]

In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?

I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.

[atcsecure]

In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?

I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.

yes to stake you need to have wallet opened, unlocked and make sure "stake" only is checked (for security) -if your wallet isn't encrypted then you don't need to unlock, however I wouldn't advise that - everybody should their encrypt wallet's

[dadon]

I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code.  All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then?  I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.

Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious?  This is an argument?  Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time.  If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration.  And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees.  All of this is the same for any alt coin. 

Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful.  I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).

Again:  The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered.  This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.

Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards.  One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.

We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks...  but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...

i love this coin, and trust ur decision, i do wish the reward blocks or something was reduced so mining could continue and or less coins entered the market as quickly as planned, i would love to see this coin under btc were ltc is now, and i believe you can do this, yes i want my investment to be worth as much as possible, but your the boss, and i respect your decision, thanks for this awesome crypto, and my chance to be apart of it. i fell like i just bought btc at $1 again, never thought i would get that opportunity again  

[battbot]

I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code.  All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then?  I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.

Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious?  This is an argument?  Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time.  If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration.  And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees.  All of this is the same for any alt coin.  

Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful.  I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).

Again:  The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered.  This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.

Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards.  One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.

We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks...  but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...

Probably around 50% of coins will always be tied up in markets.  And there is no way stakes at 3.33% annually will be reducing the total supply of 33.3M more than 1 million coins in two months.  I would be surprised if PoS blocks counted for more than 1 million XC.

Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation).  So, yea, that should give you an estimate.

[atcsecure]

Probably around 50% of coins will always be tied up in markets.  And there is no way stakes at 3.33% annually will be reducing the total supply of 33.3M more than 1 million coins in two months.  I would be surprised if PoS blocks counted for more than 1 million XC.

Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation).  So, yea, that should give you an estimate.

I'll need to gather the blockchain data since POS kicked to see the exact numbers - if anybody has some free time and can dump the blockchain stats into a CSV (since POS started) file I would appreciate it

[atcsecure]

On the renaming topic - I've narrowed it down to either just "X" or "XC" - thoughts?