|
Cryptonitex
|
 |
June 27, 2016, 05:34:40 PM |
|
 You would need about 16600 VRC to recieve a VRM bounty. If we vote for it of course  16600 VRCx 0.044 USD (today price) = USD 730.  16600. Doesn't seem like much though, But congrats if your in the top 250. |
|
|
|
|
amesterdamer
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 334
Merit: 251
Designer and CryptoCurrency Enthusiast.
|
|
June 27, 2016, 05:36:41 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoneypakTrader.com
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 472
Merit: 250
Never spend your money before you have it.
|
|
June 27, 2016, 06:42:40 PM |
|
You would need about 16600 VRC to recieve a VRM bounty. If we vote for it of course 16600 VRCx 0.044 USD (today price) = USD 730. 16600. Doesn't seem like much though, But congrats if your in the top 250. as long as the price remains at this level it does not seem much . but patience will be rewarded. sit back relax and watch vrc grow in tech and in price. |
|
|
|
|
pnosker
|
|
June 27, 2016, 07:06:55 PM |
|
Second, I would say I'm not as big of a fan of rewarding long time Vericoin holders or top 250 wallets with Verium. To me it just seems like it's a 'rich get richer' plot. I understand the idea is to rewards those who have stuck things out good & bad but in my opinion this only hurts those on the outside (who we want to get interested again).
I am not sure if I'm in the top 250, I know I have been at one point for sure, but even if I was number 1, there is something that isn't sitting well with that reward system in my mind and I'm not even sure why. I am a long term VRC user, and if there is a good way to quantify and make rewards with that fair, I am all good. It is just a weird situation where what is fair is being determined as we go, which I understand. I mean I guess things are fair in the sense we can all see what the top 250 are and if we wanted to buy enough to get high in that list to ensure a bonus. The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake. Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys. |
Support the VeriFund Endowment.
VRC: VFEndownxxnHea9mv59kZx8c7TysGbndYx
|
|
|
|
BitcoinPorn
|
|
June 27, 2016, 09:12:10 PM |
|
The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake.
Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys.
I guess things check out good so far, I mean, long ass users like myself who have been holding for years have in fact been securing this network up until this point. Wish rather than the 250 get the same amount, maybe the rewards just go down the line into smaller amounts, or a reward is based on percentage, but now it gets back to what someone else was saying regarding the rich getting richer. I guess more or less I might find issues on either side overthinking this. I trust whatever decision is made in the sense that you guys are open about it and this discussions have been taking place. I really do need to double check my balances in the main wallet. A wallet does not = a vrc address, right? Like if I had 200000 vrc, but they were put in 20 vrc increments into separate addresses, the combined total is what counts as the total wallet amount, right? |
|
|
|
souljah1h
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
Hyperspace snail
|
|
June 27, 2016, 09:26:54 PM |
|
|
_@/'
|
|
|
|
pnosker
|
|
June 27, 2016, 11:03:53 PM |
|
The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake.
Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys.
I guess things check out good so far, I mean, long ass users like myself who have been holding for years have in fact been securing this network up until this point. Wish rather than the 250 get the same amount, maybe the rewards just go down the line into smaller amounts, or a reward is based on percentage, but now it gets back to what someone else was saying regarding the rich getting richer. I guess more or less I might find issues on either side overthinking this. I trust whatever decision is made in the sense that you guys are open about it and this discussions have been taking place. I really do need to double check my balances in the main wallet. A wallet does not = a vrc address, right? Like if I had 200000 vrc, but they were put in 20 vrc increments into separate addresses, the combined total is what counts as the total wallet amount, right? Yes, wallet =/= VRC address. Make sure they're all in the same address. You can send to yourself (a particular address) if necessary. 250 was chosen because this will be a manual process and if we were to do every VRC address it would be time prohibitive. |
Support the VeriFund Endowment.
VRC: VFEndownxxnHea9mv59kZx8c7TysGbndYx
|
|
|
amesterdamer
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 334
Merit: 251
Designer and CryptoCurrency Enthusiast.
|
|
June 27, 2016, 11:09:51 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BitcoinPorn
|
|
June 28, 2016, 01:17:05 AM |
|
Yes, wallet =/= VRC address. Make sure they're all in the same address. You can send to yourself (a particular address) if necessary.
250 was chosen because this will be a manual process and if we were to do every VRC address it would be time prohibitive.
Follow up question here, and it may not even make sense, but is stake time reset if coins go to a new address? |
|
|
|
monsanto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1241
Merit: 1005
..like bright metal on a sullen ground.
|
|
June 28, 2016, 01:51:03 AM |
|
When can I convert some vericoins to verium?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptonitex
|
|
June 28, 2016, 03:36:28 AM |
|
When can I convert some vericoins to verium?
The ICO hasn't started yet. Maybe in 2 - 3 weeks it will. |
|
|
|
|
|
pnosker
|
|
June 28, 2016, 04:23:10 PM |
|
Yes, wallet =/= VRC address. Make sure they're all in the same address. You can send to yourself (a particular address) if necessary.
250 was chosen because this will be a manual process and if we were to do every VRC address it would be time prohibitive.
Follow up question here, and it may not even make sense, but is stake time reset if coins go to a new address? Yes, but if they've been staked recently the time will be about 0 anyway. |
Support the VeriFund Endowment.
VRC: VFEndownxxnHea9mv59kZx8c7TysGbndYx
|
|
|
|
BitcoinPorn
|
|
June 28, 2016, 07:48:19 PM |
|
Yes, but if they've been staked recently the time will be about 0 anyway.
So individual addresses' get reset every time a payout is made? Found this post from a while back, does this same math apply to Vericoin staking |
|
|
|
souljah1h
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
Hyperspace snail
|
|
June 28, 2016, 08:43:26 PM |
|
 Credits to amesterdamer! |
_@/'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xosihc
|
|
June 29, 2016, 12:24:09 AM |
|
Second, I would say I'm not as big of a fan of rewarding long time Vericoin holders or top 250 wallets with Verium. To me it just seems like it's a 'rich get richer' plot. I understand the idea is to rewards those who have stuck things out good & bad but in my opinion this only hurts those on the outside (who we want to get interested again).
I am not sure if I'm in the top 250, I know I have been at one point for sure, but even if I was number 1, there is something that isn't sitting well with that reward system in my mind and I'm not even sure why. I am a long term VRC user, and if there is a good way to quantify and make rewards with that fair, I am all good. It is just a weird situation where what is fair is being determined as we go, which I understand. I mean I guess things are fair in the sense we can all see what the top 250 are and if we wanted to buy enough to get high in that list to ensure a bonus. The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake. Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys. When you put it that way (rewarding those who have made the network secure) it does justify it a bit more in my mind. I'd still prefer seeing 100% of the Verium ICO being bought but you guys certainly will do what you think is best. |
|
|
|
|
|
Xosihc
|
|
June 29, 2016, 12:24:35 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warr1979
|
|
June 29, 2016, 12:27:55 AM |
|
Second, I would say I'm not as big of a fan of rewarding long time Vericoin holders or top 250 wallets with Verium. To me it just seems like it's a 'rich get richer' plot. I understand the idea is to rewards those who have stuck things out good & bad but in my opinion this only hurts those on the outside (who we want to get interested again).
I am not sure if I'm in the top 250, I know I have been at one point for sure, but even if I was number 1, there is something that isn't sitting well with that reward system in my mind and I'm not even sure why. I am a long term VRC user, and if there is a good way to quantify and make rewards with that fair, I am all good. It is just a weird situation where what is fair is being determined as we go, which I understand. I mean I guess things are fair in the sense we can all see what the top 250 are and if we wanted to buy enough to get high in that list to ensure a bonus. The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake. Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys. When you put it that way (rewarding those who have made the network secure) it does justify it a bit more in my mind. I'd still prefer seeing 100% of the Verium ICO being bought but you guys certainly will do what you think is best. Verium is meant to be minded. This ICO is just to reward Vericoin holders with a unique opportunity. If you 100% Verium then what is the point of it? |
|
|
|
|
|
Xosihc
|
|
June 29, 2016, 03:21:29 AM |
|
Second, I would say I'm not as big of a fan of rewarding long time Vericoin holders or top 250 wallets with Verium. To me it just seems like it's a 'rich get richer' plot. I understand the idea is to rewards those who have stuck things out good & bad but in my opinion this only hurts those on the outside (who we want to get interested again).
I am not sure if I'm in the top 250, I know I have been at one point for sure, but even if I was number 1, there is something that isn't sitting well with that reward system in my mind and I'm not even sure why. I am a long term VRC user, and if there is a good way to quantify and make rewards with that fair, I am all good. It is just a weird situation where what is fair is being determined as we go, which I understand. I mean I guess things are fair in the sense we can all see what the top 250 are and if we wanted to buy enough to get high in that list to ensure a bonus. The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake. Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys. When you put it that way (rewarding those who have made the network secure) it does justify it a bit more in my mind. I'd still prefer seeing 100% of the Verium ICO being bought but you guys certainly will do what you think is best. Verium is meant to be minded. This ICO is just to reward Vericoin holders with a unique opportunity. If you 100% Verium then what is the point of it? I was saying that I'd prefer to see 100% of the Verium ICO being bought - not saying 100% of all Verium should be sold to market, just that which is part of the ICO in July. |
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptonitex
|
|
June 29, 2016, 04:20:43 AM |
|
Second, I would say I'm not as big of a fan of rewarding long time Vericoin holders or top 250 wallets with Verium. To me it just seems like it's a 'rich get richer' plot. I understand the idea is to rewards those who have stuck things out good & bad but in my opinion this only hurts those on the outside (who we want to get interested again).
I am not sure if I'm in the top 250, I know I have been at one point for sure, but even if I was number 1, there is something that isn't sitting well with that reward system in my mind and I'm not even sure why. I am a long term VRC user, and if there is a good way to quantify and make rewards with that fair, I am all good. It is just a weird situation where what is fair is being determined as we go, which I understand. I mean I guess things are fair in the sense we can all see what the top 250 are and if we wanted to buy enough to get high in that list to ensure a bonus. The idea is that it rewards those that have been securing the network. It logistically doesn't make sense to award all the addresses because we will be manually checking balances and stakes to ensure that the owners fit the criteria for the giveaway. We don't want to award exchanges with VRC because they just hold and don't stake. Not only that, but the amount of VRM we would like to give away is small compared to the ICO. It's simply a token of our appreciation for those that supported us. It's about as open as it could be with a public list, fair warning before the ICO, and direct distribution via identical public keys. When you put it that way (rewarding those who have made the network secure) it does justify it a bit more in my mind. I'd still prefer seeing 100% of the Verium ICO being bought but you guys certainly will do what you think is best. It's a PoW coin... It's meant to be mined, so buying all of it this early is completely pointless. It would make the coin worthless. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
