[ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released

[Arsène Lupin]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1aqur3juJHY/UqETJmPFuII/AAAAAAAAPYY/S39TN5CNMJc/s1600/as_you_wish.gif

[altcoinUK]

my apologies for mistaking 1.3 mil being given to Mr JL... I was going off of kevandos vrcradio info from previous recording but this deal has been changed so many times by so many different ppl that it has been hard to keep track.

Allow me to state more clearly and please do correct me if I am wrong but 2.6 million vrc will be given to "supernet" as assets "controlled" by the vrc community of which a certain percentage will go to James' personal wallet once the price hits 50k for a day and another percentage payment to JL once prices hits 100k for a day.

and James yes, it does when you have the intentions of using vrc as the entry and exit point of fiat to a system or network used for illicit and non compliant/prohibited transactions.

I suggest that the devs get with a top level NY financial legal consultant preferably one already familiar with digital currencies, the banking industry, and potential liabilities and discuss all possible scenarios to minimize exposure. Although this will not be a cheap venture as anyone decent will cost an average price of $1000+ an hr (our last qtr. rate was 1250 per hr) it would pay off in the long run for vrc and its public devs.


and yes barabbas the price is up 60% since james' involvement but 60% is nothing in this world of crypto...


you also did not see me running around shouting about the lupin effect when vrc went up by 10000% or how it is still 2000% above the price at the time of our entrance to the market which was 500-700 vrc.


and yes lootz I feel the same way... but that will not stop him from doing as he pleases to make examples of people.

What are you saying, are you holding vericoin, selling it or buying? Are you still supporting the operation or moving out from the coin?

[barabbas]

my apologies for mistaking 1.3 mil being given to Mr JL... I was going off of kevandos vrcradio info from previous recording but this deal has been changed so many times by so many different ppl that it has been hard to keep track.

Allow me to state more clearly and please do correct me if I am wrong but 2.6 million vrc will be given to "supernet" as assets "controlled" by the vrc community of which a certain percentage will go to James' personal wallet once the price hits 50k for a day and another percentage payment to JL once prices hits 100k for a day.

and James yes, it does when you have the intentions of using vrc as the entry and exit point of fiat to a system or network used for illicit and non compliant/prohibited transactions.

I suggest that the devs get with a top level NY financial legal consultant preferably one already familiar with digital currencies, the banking industry, and potential liabilities and discuss all possible scenarios to minimize exposure. Although this will not be a cheap venture as anyone decent will cost an average price of $1000+ an hr (our last qtr. rate was 1250 per hr) it would pay off in the long run for vrc and its public devs.


and yes barabbas the price is up 60% since james' involvement but 60% is nothing in this world of crypto...


you also did not see me running around shouting about the lupin effect when vrc went up by 10000% or how it is still 2000% above the price at the time of our entrance to the market which was 500-700 vrc.


and yes lootz I feel the same way... but that will not stop him from doing as he pleases to make examples of people.

Arsene, you still don't get it:  but "...this deal has been changed so many times by so many different ppl that it has been hard to keep track." is both misleading AND incorrect. This deal has only been changed by one person, James. Only by him. And yes, he has changed it a couple of times -every single one in favor of Vericoin's community, it is important to say- but I find that you looking for in formation from other sources, when you have posted here, from the horse's mouth (not only James but also the devs of Vericoin), the truth, seem quite absurd... or worse.

Again: You still have it wrong. Quite. James is no longer asking for any personal compensation to him... except anything the the Vericoin community deems he deserved and decides to give to him when and if the results exceed the thresholds already set. It will be entirely VOLUNTARY. You get that, don't you? But ask James for further clarification before reaching quite "fou" conclusions on your own.

The other thing where you are 100% WRONG -so I am correcting you, as requested- is in the matter of the 2.6 million VRC "given" to SuperNET... NOTHING will be "given" here. It is, currently, an initial requirement of the SuperNET to have the candidates to be part of its core, invest 10% of their total value in SuperNET which, in turn, will invest the same amount in the candidate. So instead of "given" it would be a "swap" of equal value. Quite a different proposition.

Now, as James has explained, these things change and adapt depending on the many variables and circumstances along the way, so nothing is either guaranteed nor written on stone. And EVERYTHING will depend on the free will of the Vericoin community when those milestones are reached.

Which, like in the case of your advice regarding future potential legislation, is I am afraid, quite premature.

As for 60% being "nothing in this world of crypto..." I get your meaning, clumsy and absurd as it is, but it is still 60%: People have 13 now where they had 8... which is MORE than 60% but still good for reference purposes.

Now you are quite funny indeed when you state that you didn't go running around shouting the gains in Vericoin after the launch were "the Lupin effect"... Really funny. You know what? They weren't "the lupin effect". The lupin effect is, in a very twisted way, laughable (because laugh is good, which is the opposite of what you, lupin, represent). I'm sorry for being a bit blunt but coming here completely uninformed, spreading all kind of misinformation and somehow pretending that having 1/2 million VRC gives you any kind of authority, makes me feel that I need to be way blunt-er. Like medieval blunter. So I exercise quite a bit of restrain to keep it civil.

I hope you appreciate it.

[wetwipe]

When is the new forum due?, it was or maybe seems like it was a while back since it was said "wont be long now", yes im just asking so no bashing !.

I would like to add that i'm currently tuned into Reavons discussion on the VRC Radio with Kev.

So thanks for putting it all on loop/replay? so the community have the option to catch up. Thanks.

[pnosker]

That Doesn't sound Veri Democratic.

More coins = more votes. Humm!!

Why so? People who were putting more in the fund are risking more then people who didnt.
I think thats a good incentive for people to send vrc into the fund.
I.e. it would suck if a troll that has no vrc in the fund would have as much votingpower as me who put thousands of vrc in there... tbh that would be not veri democratic ughs

I strongly disagree.

One Person. One vote!

Pat,`   
   You're comparing apples to oranges. POS  isn't a Democracy.

   In a Democracy everybody is equal. Because someone has more stuff doesn't entitle them to influence decisions affecting the entire community. One person, One vote.

   The suggestion that  every community member contribute  10%  of their holdings isn't binding.  It's up to the individual holder how much they "invest" in a proposal concerning fund raising. The reality is it  won't be strickly adhered to. Some will give more. Some will give less. Some will give nothing.

   In the purest sense a vote should be taken by the community BEFORE asking for contributions  and with what the funds raised will be used for clearly spelled out. This should occur prior to kicking off a campaign for capitalization.

    James' magnanimous  gesture (assuming no hidden agenda's) of returning the 536,042 coins raised (and anymore of the 2.6 million he required) to the community had stipulations on how it is to be used.
                 1.The dev's must be in favor of any project to be funded.
                 2. The community gets to vote on it.
                 3.  The result of the community vote would decided the fate of the proposed project.

    Now it's being said  a "weighted vote"  will be used to decide how, when, and for what purpose the Veri-SuperNet Fund will be utilised. This method  gives a contributor votes in proportion to the amount of Vericoin they transferred to the funding drive.  It is not a Democratic vote. Those in the community who didn't contribute are effectivrly excluded  from having a voice in what the community is proposing.
    Humm! Sounds something like a "Special Interest Group" having it's way because it gave money to ensure the vote came out in their favor. It certainly isn't Democracy.

As far as I am concerned, those who donated get to choose where their money goes. I'm not the final say in the matter, however. But that's my personal vote. And it makes sense to have it based upon the coins that were contributed as those people put more currency at stake. But we should definitely hold a discussion to see what people's thoughts are.

If that 536,042 coins were a crypto network, it would be decided by the majority votes according to coin count.

[wetwipe]

Either way Kevondo, AKA  (Eugene) .

The whole veri community still has to overcome this and still make the next hike to raise the next milestone of coins.

[Kevondo]

That Doesn't sound Veri Democratic.

More coins = more votes. Humm!!

Why so? People who were putting more in the fund are risking more then people who didnt.
I think thats a good incentive for people to send vrc into the fund.
I.e. it would suck if a troll that has no vrc in the fund would have as much votingpower as me who put thousands of vrc in there... tbh that would be not veri democratic ughs

I strongly disagree.

One Person. One vote!

Pat,`   
   You're comparing apples to oranges. POS  isn't a Democracy.

   In a Democracy everybody is equal. Because someone has more stuff doesn't entitle them to influence decisions affecting the entire community. One person, One vote.

   The suggestion that  every community member contribute  10%  of their holdings isn't binding.  It's up to the individual holder how much they "invest" in a proposal concerning fund raising. The reality is it  won't be strickly adhered to. Some will give more. Some will give less. Some will give nothing.

   In the purest sense a vote should be taken by the community BEFORE asking for contributions  and with what the funds raised will be used for clearly spelled out. This should occur prior to kicking off a campaign for capitalization.

    James' magnanimous  gesture (assuming no hidden agenda's) of returning the 536,042 coins raised (and anymore of the 2.6 million he required) to the community had stipulations on how it is to be used.
                 1.The dev's must be in favor of any project to be funded.
                 2. The community gets to vote on it.
                 3.  The result of the community vote would decided the fate of the proposed project.

    Now it's being said  a "weighted vote"  will be used to decide how, when, and for what purpose the Veri-SuperNet Fund will be utilised. This method  gives a contributor votes in proportion to the amount of Vericoin they transferred to the funding drive.  It is not a Democratic vote. Those in the community who didn't contribute are effectivrly excluded  from having a voice in what the community is proposing.
    Humm! Sounds something like a "Special Interest Group" having it's way because it gave money to ensure the vote came out in their favor. It certainly isn't Democracy.

As far as I am concerned, those who donated get to choose where their money goes. I'm not the final say in the matter, however. But that's my personal vote. And it makes sense to have it based upon the coins that were contributed as those people put more currency at stake. But we should definitely hold a discussion to see what people's thoughts are.

If that 536,042 coins were a crypto network, it would be decided by the majority votes according to coin count.

But the Veri-SuperNET Fund isn't a crypto network. It was given by James to the Community with it's use to be at the discretion of the Community.

[Kevondo]

Either way Kevondo, AKA  (Eugene) .

The whole veri community still has to overcome this and still make the next hike to raise the next milestone of coins.

Wet Wipe,

Kevondo and Eugen are two different individuals.

Reavon is Eugen's handle on the forums and IRC. I might have confused you with the bit about my middle name being Eugene. Also Reavon spells Eugen without an "e" on the end as I do. 

The Reavon interview is and has been available "On Demand" if you scroll down on The VRCRadio Homepage. The Daily show also is now avaiable if you are unable to listen live.

VRCRadio has been and will remain in a state of flux until we get the design the way we think will be most effective. So search around it and let us know what you think. We welcome any constructive critisim and  suggestions.

The backend has incredible power/functionality through the CSS program Joomla. Coupled with MixLR they make for  a potent Broadcasting solution.

Thanks for Listening

[Autodidact]

I can imagine a situation where people donating about 100 VRC are holding as strong of a vote as someone who donated 100,000.  You could get trolls coming out of no-where, getting together, and throwing 100 VRC each to swing votes in a direction that may not represent the community properly.  I think weighted votes are the only way to do it.

Something like:
100VRC-1000VRC donated = 1 vote
1001VRC-10,000VRC = 2 votes
10,001VRC-30,000VRC = 2.5 votes
30,001VRC-50,000VRC = 3 votes

Just an example.. I'm sure it could be structured fairly, albeit I'm not the best to go for advice on this but it seems like a fair method to me...

[tom14cat14]

I can imagine a situation where people donating about 100 VRC are holding as strong of a vote as someone who donated 100,000.  You could get trolls coming out of no-where, getting together, and throwing 100 VRC each to swing votes in a direction that may not represent the community properly.  I think weighted votes are the only way to do it.

Something like:
100VRC-1000VRC donated = 1 vote
1001VRC-10,000VRC = 2 votes
10,001VRC-30,000VRC = 2.5 votes
30,001VRC-50,000VRC = 3 votes

Just an example.. I'm sure it could be structured fairly, albeit I'm not the best to go for advice on this but it seems like a fair method to me...

I have to agree. No matter what we think things are not equal. If someone has a lot more money invested then be they should have more say because they have much more than me to loose. Same with people with less then me. If I am top dog I sure as hell do not want someone that has .0001% of what I have invested running how my money is handled.

[jl777]

I can imagine a situation where people donating about 100 VRC are holding as strong of a vote as someone who donated 100,000.  You could get trolls coming out of no-where, getting together, and throwing 100 VRC each to swing votes in a direction that may not represent the community properly.  I think weighted votes are the only way to do it.

Something like:
100VRC-1000VRC donated = 1 vote
1001VRC-10,000VRC = 2 votes
10,001VRC-30,000VRC = 2.5 votes
30,001VRC-50,000VRC = 3 votes

Just an example.. I'm sure it could be structured fairly, albeit I'm not the best to go for advice on this but it seems like a fair method to me...

I have to agree. No matter what we think things are not equal. If someone has a lot more money invested then be they should have more say because they have much more than me to loose. Same with people with less then me. If I am top dog I sure as hell do not want someone that has .0001% of what I have invested running how my money is handled.

Obviously, the vote of how to spend the donations should be by those who go now and donate with each coin being 1 vote.  Anything else is wholly unfair.

100 VRC donated = 100 votes
50,000 VRC donated = 50,000 votes.

That is what weighted means and that is why I believe James choose the word "weighted" when he first donated the coins back to the community.  Very simple and fair.

correct
golden rule applies to these things

[Afridon]

I have heard that VRC have joined the supernet work!Good for all of us!

[effectsToCause]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to give an update.  New wallet is in final stages.  Sneak peek at it is coming tomorrow.  There is a few finishing touches, a little more testing, compilation for the three OSes, then we will release it.  So we are at like 99% on that.

[ereborltc]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to give an update.  New wallet is in final stages.  Sneak peek at it is coming tomorrow.  There is a few finishing touches, a little more testing, compilation for the three OSes, then we will release it.  So we are at like 99% on that.

Yessir!! thats what i like to see! lets keep this momentum!

thanks!

[setup]

Am I the only one who is getting nearly nothing out of the mining pool at the moment? I have a 28 Mh/s Scrypt miner running since 4 days and got only something like 40 VRC.

[Aliyah]

I have heard that VRC is going to cooprated with supernet.Am i right?

[Kevondo]

I have heard that VRC is going to cooprated with supernet.Am i right?

Yes. But "has been" and 'is" co-opearating/in concert with/working with are more exact.
 

[Kevondo]

I can imagine a situation where people donating about 100 VRC are holding as strong of a vote as someone who donated 100,000.  You could get trolls coming out of no-where, getting together, and throwing 100 VRC each to swing votes in a direction that may not represent the community properly.  I think weighted votes are the only way to do it.

Something like:
100VRC-1000VRC donated = 1 vote
1001VRC-10,000VRC = 2 votes
10,001VRC-30,000VRC = 2.5 votes
30,001VRC-50,000VRC = 3 votes

Just an example.. I'm sure it could be structured fairly, albeit I'm not the best to go for advice on this but it seems like a fair method to me...

I have to agree. No matter what we think things are not equal. If someone has a lot more money invested then be they should have more say because they have much more than me to loose. Same with people with less then me. If I am top dog I sure as hell do not want someone that has .0001% of what I have invested running how my money is handled.

Obviously, the vote of how to spend the donations should be by those who go now and donate with each coin being 1 vote.  Anything else is wholly unfair.

100 VRC donated = 100 votes
50,000 VRC donated = 50,000 votes.

That is what weighted means and that is why I believe James choose the word "weighted" when he first donated the coins back to the community.  Very simple and fair.

correct
golden rule applies to these things

l
The above attitudes are the driving forces behind corruption. (see Kevondo's Rule . "EveryBody Counts")

The "Haves" can Buy their way in and have it their way.

The conundrum is how to insure a truely democratic vote.

 Pehaps James can come up with a Block-Chain Two, voter registration solution, that gives one vote to each community member regardless of level of wealth. This would be a 'Game Changer" for all of socitey. A secure, tamper proof, mechinism for conducting a vote within a pure Democratic, one person/one vote, all people are equal, entity.  

This solution would have to insure "anonomity" to satisfy some.

                                     --OR--

Maybe we should deterimine if  VeriCoin is based on Democratic principles. One vote for each VRC owned is NOT how a Democracy operates.

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

James. The Golden Rule I know is "Do unto others as you would want done unto you."

If some Whale came in and contributed 500,037 VRC he would hold a majority of the coins.

In the case of a 2/3 majority being needed the Whale would only have to get holders or proxies from other holders of slightly less then  170,000 VRC to win control. The amount needed for control could be reduced further by additional contributions by the originating, Big Buying, Whale.

[vtec2liter]

Everyone, sometimes we have to take a leap of faith the Trust comes later. Look at the work has James has put into Vericoin. He sees something here that can really be a game changer. I have quite a lot invested in this coin myself. I have even put coin into Supernet because I believe in the plan and in the Devs. Lets come together and move forward we all have Stake in the coin so lets all work to get it moving in the direction it should be moving. Shall we?

[Xosihc]

I'm excited to see this new wallet UI. I've heard some really good things about it.