[ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"

[gamblingbad]

I would support most of the alternatives, what ever you choose or get people voting on.
1. Contunies everything as it is.
2. Changeing clam rules to not allow digging
3. Use a snapshot of clamchain to base a new coin on
Thats all fine for me.

But i think most investors wont support anything when its unknown.

You can also say everything will continue as normal and there will be taken a new snapshot in future a few days before a the new coin will be made.
It can be based on both snapshot or the last one.
Then people can safetly buy clam without worry jd will get a new coin.

Snapshot would have to be in the past to avoid manipulation

2 days or a week before coin was made would be in past when coin was ready. But when saying take snapshot now and not have any real plans yet to make a coin make people not want to buy. And what manipulation you talk about? People buy more clam and price goes up you mean to secure getting the new coin? And after people got new coin clam market will drop far down.

[thefix]

I would support most of the alternatives, what ever you choose or get people voting on.
1. Contunies everything as it is.
2. Changeing clam rules to not allow digging
3. Use a snapshot of clamchain to base a new coin on
Thats all fine for me.

But i think most investors wont support anything when its unknown.

You can also say everything will continue as normal and there will be taken a new snapshot in future a few days before a the new coin will be made.
It can be based on both snapshot or the last one.
Then people can safetly buy clam without worry jd will get a new coin.

Snapshot would have to be in the past to avoid manipulation

What? Choosing a past block (without being transparent about it) *IS* manipulation. It gives advantage to those who "made" that decision.

This is how Clam was originally distributed, so those that dig/buy Clam should be familiar with that type of distribution.

[whywetrance]

Guess you guys want to alienate some users or kill the coin.


Really wish I would have checked the ann before installing the qt in an attempt to retrieve 2 old doge dats. It just seems like a waist of time now. When people look for clamcoin information they will stumble on all this bickering & how the community felt they best needed to f*ck-over stake-holders. Not a good image to put out there, and most of us have been around long enough to know how this all ends. The initial marketing ploy of "old dat redemption" was nice, but flawed. Now the coin will suffer either way (by exploit or by internal strife).




It's sh*ty when you genuinely have interest in a coin; Only to find the community coming apart at the seams.





Once again- Anyone have an updated bootstrap? mid October or around now?
 
 


good luck

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[smooth]

I would support most of the alternatives, what ever you choose or get people voting on.
1. Contunies everything as it is.
2. Changeing clam rules to not allow digging
3. Use a snapshot of clamchain to base a new coin on
Thats all fine for me.

But i think most investors wont support anything when its unknown.

You can also say everything will continue as normal and there will be taken a new snapshot in future a few days before a the new coin will be made.
It can be based on both snapshot or the last one.
Then people can safetly buy clam without worry jd will get a new coin.

Snapshot would have to be in the past to avoid manipulation

Incorrect. That would be the case with a nonlinear scheme. But with a snapshot spin off where balances are proportional there is no manipulation possible by doing it in the future. There is simply a cutoff, known to everyone, where buying coins before that point gets you the new coins and buying coins after (presumably at a lower price) does not. In fact doing it in the past has more potential for manipulation as several people have already stated.

[smooth]

You are assuming a retroactive self-serving block is chosen, which it may be. In that case, yes, those who bought or dug after the block would be disadvantaged. I'm guessing whoever is choosing the block would not be among them (at least not to a significant degree).

I announced that I had taken the snapshot as soon as the snapshot was taken.

Anyone buying after that either knew about it or didn't care enough to keep up with this thread or the JD chat.

It seems to me that we're never going to reach agreement on how best to proceed. I don't know what else to try. Taking a vote is unpopular. Making a new coin is unpopular. Leaving things unchanged is unpopular. It seems that no matter what I suggest I'm the bad guy.

I would just say "fuck it" and leave things how they are - but then someone will accuse me of being the digger and say that this whole conversation was planned to arrive at that conclusion. So I just don't know what to do for the best.

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

Furthermore it is also important to get a statement from participants such as Poloniex about what they are going to do, again well ahead of the cutoff. If they are going to honor the spin-off by retrieving the new coins and assigning them proportionately to customers' accounts people may want to take completely different actions than if they are going to keep the new coins for themselves (sounds silly perhaps, but another exchange actually states that explicitly in its Terms of Service) or not claim them at all.

[Gladimor]

You are assuming a retroactive self-serving block is chosen, which it may be. In that case, yes, those who bought or dug after the block would be disadvantaged. I'm guessing whoever is choosing the block would not be among them (at least not to a significant degree).

I announced that I had taken the snapshot as soon as the snapshot was taken.

Anyone buying after that either knew about it or didn't care enough to keep up with this thread or the JD chat.

It seems to me that we're never going to reach agreement on how best to proceed. I don't know what else to try. Taking a vote is unpopular. Making a new coin is unpopular. Leaving things unchanged is unpopular. It seems that no matter what I suggest I'm the bad guy.

I would just say "fuck it" and leave things how they are - but then someone will accuse me of being the digger and say that this whole conversation was planned to arrive at that conclusion. So I just don't know what to do for the best.

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

I've been following the drama here lately. I agree with smooth. Select a future block, and let the market sort itself out.

[crazyivan]

Guess you guys want to alienate some users or kill the coin.


Really wish I would have checked the ann before installing the qt in an attempt to retrieve 2 old doge dats. It just seems like a waist of time now. When people look for clamcoin information they will stumble on all this bickering & how the community felt they best needed to f*ck-over stake-holders. Not a good image to put out there, and most of us have been around long enough to know how this all ends. The initial marketing ploy of "old dat redemption" was nice, but flawed. Now the coin will suffer either way (by exploit or by internal strife).




It's sh*ty when you genuinely have interest in a coin; Only to find the community coming apart at the seams.





Once again- Anyone have an updated bootstrap? mid October or around now?
 
 


good luck

WTF r u talking about?

The community s not falling apart. The community s only complaining about the fact a potentially great coins has turned into serving one purpose and one purpose only, for the digger to have nice place to dump his coins and make money. Is this it? Are we all in this for the digger to make money? If this is the case, pls say so people know what to expect in the future.  

[whywetrance]

Guess you guys want to alienate some users or kill the coin.


Really wish I would have checked the ann before installing the qt in an attempt to retrieve 2 old doge dats. It just seems like a waist of time now. When people look for clamcoin information they will stumble on all this bickering & how the community felt they best needed to f*ck-over stake-holders. Not a good image to put out there, and most of us have been around long enough to know how this all ends. The initial marketing ploy of "old dat redemption" was nice, but flawed. Now the coin will suffer either way (by exploit or by internal strife).




It's sh*ty when you genuinely have interest in a coin; Only to find the community coming apart at the seams.





Once again- Anyone have an updated bootstrap? mid October or around now?
 
 


good luck

WTF r u talking about?

The community s not falling apart. The community s only complaining about the fact a potentially great coins has turned into serving one purpose and one purpose only, for the digger to have nice place to dump his coins and make money. Is this it? Are we all in this for the digger to make money? If this is the case, pls say so people know what to expect in the future.  

You guys are..   It's simple to see that leadership is splintered.

 

[danonthehill]

You are assuming a retroactive self-serving block is chosen, which it may be. In that case, yes, those who bought or dug after the block would be disadvantaged. I'm guessing whoever is choosing the block would not be among them (at least not to a significant degree).

I announced that I had taken the snapshot as soon as the snapshot was taken.

Anyone buying after that either knew about it or didn't care enough to keep up with this thread or the JD chat.

It seems to me that we're never going to reach agreement on how best to proceed. I don't know what else to try. Taking a vote is unpopular. Making a new coin is unpopular. Leaving things unchanged is unpopular. It seems that no matter what I suggest I'm the bad guy.

I would just say "fuck it" and leave things how they are - but then someone will accuse me of being the digger and say that this whole conversation was planned to arrive at that conclusion. So I just don't know what to do for the best.

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

I've been following the drama here lately. I agree with smooth. Select a future block, and let the market sort itself out.

This seems like the simplest and fairest solution.   

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[thefix]

It seems to me that we're never going to reach agreement on how best to proceed. I don't know what else to try. Taking a vote is unpopular. Making a new coin is unpopular. Leaving things unchanged is unpopular. It seems that no matter what I suggest I'm the bad guy.

I think that's pretty normal in altcoin world - often hard to reach a concensus, or even intelligent discussion sometimes  

For the record I don't think you are the "bad guy".

I think you are going to have to make the call, and some people will not be happy some will. You cant please all the people all the time.

So I don't have to spend time (in which I should be coding ) reading the past * days discussion could you please summarise the advantages / reasons for starting Doogcoin?

I am with you on this point, just make a decision on Doogcoin and let us know one way or another.

[DrkLvr_]

This seems like the simplest and fairest solution.   

I think dooglus point is, that in this case the "digger" could dig all his hidden CLAM before a future deadline.
However, the intention of this new coin is (and it is the only intention) to disposess the whales property.

Far from democratic, but that is the goal as I understood it.

How is it not democratic when you can choose to support the new coin or not?

[nicolaennio]

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

Any solution which doesn't allow anyone to do insider trading is "fair". In this case we trust that dooglus didn't do it, supposedly the only one knowing about the screenshot. But looking at Poloniex volume nothing strange seems happened.

A snapshot in the future could be maybe "fairer", but it will lead to quite a price turmoil, with a possible bubble where many people will end up making poor trading decisions and losing money. This is already quite bad when nobody wants it, but looking actively for it seems like pushing the gas toward a wall.

[smooth]

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

Any solution which doesn't allow anyone to do insider trading is "fair". In this case we trust that dooglus didn't do it, supposedly the only one knowing about the screenshot. But looking at Poloniex volume nothing strange seems happened.

A snapshot in the future could be maybe "fairer", but it will lead to quite a price turmoil, with a possible bubble where many people will end up making poor trading decisions and losing money. This is already quite bad when nobody wants it, but looking actively for it seems like pushing the gas toward a wall.

I mostly agree that doesn't make a huge difference and I did say earlier that if creating a new coin you can choose whatever distribution you want, but I do see a significant issue in terms of uncertainty and turmoil with coins on Poloniex. Until Poloniex makes it clear what they are going to do, people have no idea what it is they actually own.

[Jabbawa]

You are assuming a retroactive self-serving block is chosen, which it may be. In that case, yes, those who bought or dug after the block would be disadvantaged. I'm guessing whoever is choosing the block would not be among them (at least not to a significant degree).

I announced that I had taken the snapshot as soon as the snapshot was taken.

Anyone buying after that either knew about it or didn't care enough to keep up with this thread or the JD chat.

It seems to me that we're never going to reach agreement on how best to proceed. I don't know what else to try. Taking a vote is unpopular. Making a new coin is unpopular. Leaving things unchanged is unpopular. It seems that no matter what I suggest I'm the bad guy.

I would just say "fuck it" and leave things how they are - but then someone will accuse me of being the digger and say that this whole conversation was planned to arrive at that conclusion. So I just don't know what to do for the best.

Just choose a block well in the future and let the market sort it out. People who want to buy or sell before the cutoff will do so. People who want to wait until after and just buy or sell one of the coins can do that. That is completely fair to everyone. No one gets any particular potential advantage from the choice of the block.

Furthermore it is also important to get a statement from participants such as Poloniex about what they are going to do, again well ahead of the cutoff. If they are going to honor the spin-off by retrieving the new coins and assigning them proportionately to customers' accounts people may want to take completely different actions than if they are going to keep the new coins for themselves (sounds silly perhaps, but another exchange actually states that explicitly in its Terms of Service) or not claim them at all.

Well said.

Yes +1 to that, surely this is the only fair solution and the right decision to make?!

[Gladimor]

As smooth said earlier, the best approach to this is to select a block in the future. It is the only fair compromise. Whether it happen 100 or 1000 blocks from now, it will allow investors to secure their positions with the NewCoin or CLAM. Because picking an older block will ONLY be fair to the insiders.

[BayAreaCoins]

Selling:

www.Doogcoin.com and www.Doogcoin.org for 3,000 CLAM!

[smooth]

As smooth said earlier, the best approach to this is to select a block in the future. It is the only fair compromise. Whether it happen 100 or 1000 blocks from now, it will allow investors to secure their positions with the NewCoin or CLAM. Because picking an older block will ONLY be fair to the insiders.

I'm pretty sure I said well in the future. People don't necessarily sign on every day or even every few days. Give them some time to learn about what is going to happen and decide what if any actions they want to take.

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged