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

[romjpn]

Don't forget guys, if we take in account the total supply of CLAM, it jumps up to the 6th place in term of marketcap .
http://bravenewcoin.com/price/price-index/

[SuperClam]

Don't forget guys, if we take in account the total supply of CLAM, it jumps up to the 6th place in term of marketcap .
http://bravenewcoin.com/price/price-index/

Shhhhh

[dooglus]

I've been asked to make my current thoughts clear.

I don't plan on making any kind of a new coin at the moment. SuperCLAM has stepped up and proposed a polling system (that I don't yet fully understand), and so I am willing to see how that pans out. If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

I'm not committing to never making a new coin, but I don't think it's likely that I will make one. CLAM is niche enough as it is without further splitting the community into two pieces.

[thefix]

I've been asked to make my current thoughts clear.

I don't plan on making any kind of a new coin at the moment. SuperCLAM has stepped up and proposed a polling system (that I don't yet fully understand), and so I am willing to see how that pans out. If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

I'm not committing to never making a new coin, but I don't think it's likely that I will make one. CLAM is niche enough as it is without further splitting the community into two pieces.

Thanks for making that clear, it will be easy to make a decision now.

[SuperClam]

I've been asked to make my current thoughts clear.
I don't plan on making any kind of a new coin at the moment. SuperCLAM has stepped up and proposed a polling system (that I don't yet fully understand), and so I am willing to see how that pans out. If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.
I'm not committing to never making a new coin, but I don't think it's likely that I will make one. CLAM is niche enough as it is without further splitting the community into two pieces.

We will get the specifics hammered out.

As I see it, the important part is that the system is fair, provable and reflects the desires of stakeholders.

The first vote should be simplified, so that we can put this current issue to rest and move forward.

But, I think CLAM would be well served if the system as a whole was implemented such that anyone could create and promote a petition for change.
It breaks my heart every time I see contributors to projects with great ideas and working code rebuked by the project's maintainers.
It becomes much more difficult for a maintainer to rebuke a proposal when it comes with the provable support of the network.

I would expect that if the entire issue around Hearn's Lighthouse(?name) had simply been dealt with, much of the animosity in the BTC project could have been avoided.
This also applies to other BIPs and changes which have languished in the BTC project.

It is difficult for a project to move forward without an efficient means to poll the network about support.
Forums, reddit and trollboxes are not suited to polling support - they simply supply little useful data.

[romjpn]

I've been asked to make my current thoughts clear.

I don't plan on making any kind of a new coin at the moment. SuperCLAM has stepped up and proposed a polling system (that I don't yet fully understand), and so I am willing to see how that pans out. If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

I'm not committing to never making a new coin, but I don't think it's likely that I will make one. CLAM is niche enough as it is without further splitting the community into two pieces.

Thanks ! I was a little bit worried about that new coin project (I don't think it would be good).

[jpcfan]

you mean bay bought doogcoin.com for nothing now?



there goes 3000 clam bay

[rychallenge]

can someone get a blockchain record for this? It's the diggers CLAM address:
http://khashier.com/address/xBwGnpTefKqyHn6ZizJzp17zFmjGLQsv7S

actually, it belongs to poloniex, and I want to see how much he's dumped (he's digging directly to his address).

[BayAreaCoins]

you mean bay bought doogcoin.com for nothing now?

there goes 3000 clam bay

Way she goes I guess

Doogcoin.org too.

If the vote doesn't go the way Dooglus wants he will create his own coin I'm sure.  This is just him trying to let Creative do his dirty work for him, but she's a bit of a scrub IMO.  Not overly worried about it.

Most people I speak to privately have a strong distrust for CreativeClam (SuperCLAM) and we all think she is the digger of at least one big dig.

I strongly considered having a PI keep an eye on her when I was more involved with CLAMS, but now days... meh.

[BayAreaCoins]

If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

Basically however you can spin it to get your way is fine right?  Creative is here to do your dirty work for you, so you don't have to be the on directly spitting in peoples faces and losing investor confidence... Creative has been doing that since I've heard of CLAM .

Y'all are going to keep pounding at this thing till peoples gifted CLAMs are removed.

Be it voting, new coin or other trickery.

I'd never buy my Clamcoins back just to vote with a few shitcoin devs and a power tripping Bitcoiner.  Anyone who would sink $10,000 into voting is a fucktard IMO.  The rich should never have more vote than the poor.  Creative and I had this talk when I owned a huge chunk of the network... we both agreed it was bad news bears, but now when it is "needed" to push a highly questionable fork that obviously doesn't have consensus .... well tada  .

I plan on voting with my services and cranking the faucets transactions up even more... hopefully voting is based on transactions because we can handle that... I think we created the most CLAM transactions as well out of any service at this point.

[BayAreaCoins]

Lol, another whiny little bitch. BAC put a mask on you're contagious.

You don't say...

[SuperClam]

Deleted for personally attacking BayAreaCoins

[BayAreaCoins]

Deleted for personally attacking BayAreaCoins

thank god I was sitting on the toilet already because I just shit myself

[SuperClam]

If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

Basically however you can spin it to get your way is fine right?  Creative is here to do your dirty work for you, so you don't have to be the on directly spitting in peoples faces and losing investor confidence... Creative has been doing that since I've heard of CLAM .
Y'all are going to keep pounding at this thing till peoples gifted CLAMs are removed.
Be it voting, new coin or other trickery.
I'd never buy my Clamcoins back just to vote with a few shitcoin devs and a power tripping Bitcoiner.  Anyone who would sink $10,000 into voting is a fucktard IMO.  The rich should never have more vote than the poor.  Creative and I had this talk when I owned a huge chunk of the network... we both agreed it was bad news bears, but now when it is "needed" to push a highly questionable fork that obviously doesn't have consensus .... well tada  .
I plan on voting with my services and cranking the faucets transactions up even more... hopefully voting is based on transactions because we can handle that... I think we created the most CLAM transactions as well out of any service at this point.

You don't agree with the network voting on development priorities.
Noted.

However, if you care about the result of a petition, it would benefit you to participate.
Your choice.

[BayAreaCoins]

If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

Basically however you can spin it to get your way is fine right?  Creative is here to do your dirty work for you, so you don't have to be the on directly spitting in peoples faces and losing investor confidence... Creative has been doing that since I've heard of CLAM .
Y'all are going to keep pounding at this thing till peoples gifted CLAMs are removed.
Be it voting, new coin or other trickery.
I'd never buy my Clamcoins back just to vote with a few shitcoin devs and a power tripping Bitcoiner.  Anyone who would sink $10,000 into voting is a fucktard IMO.  The rich should never have more vote than the poor.  Creative and I had this talk when I owned a huge chunk of the network... we both agreed it was bad news bears, but now when it is "needed" to push a highly questionable fork that obviously doesn't have consensus .... well tada  .
I plan on voting with my services and cranking the faucets transactions up even more... hopefully voting is based on transactions because we can handle that... I think we created the most CLAM transactions as well out of any service at this point.

You don't agree with the network voting on development priorities.
Noted.

However, if you care about the result of a petition, it would benefit you to participate.
Your choice.

I will participate of course with whatever fuckery y'all choose to do of course.

I can just see why a developer with a massive stash of pre made BTC/DOGE wallets for CLAM would like the vote to be based on how many coins ppl own... seems sketchy and feels murky voting with votes based on a your financial status.

There obviously isn't consensus and these different tactics of ramming unwanted shit down our throats six ways from Sunday is getting old & shaking investor confidence to the core... Leave CLAM how it is and lets move forward with interesting stuff like staking addresses through signing rather than a priv key ect.

[SuperClam]

If we as a community can use the forthcoming polling system to make changes that we want then I don't see the need for a new coin.

Basically however you can spin it to get your way is fine right?  Creative is here to do your dirty work for you, so you don't have to be the on directly spitting in peoples faces and losing investor confidence... Creative has been doing that since I've heard of CLAM .
Y'all are going to keep pounding at this thing till peoples gifted CLAMs are removed.
Be it voting, new coin or other trickery.
I'd never buy my Clamcoins back just to vote with a few shitcoin devs and a power tripping Bitcoiner.  Anyone who would sink $10,000 into voting is a fucktard IMO.  The rich should never have more vote than the poor.  Creative and I had this talk when I owned a huge chunk of the network... we both agreed it was bad news bears, but now when it is "needed" to push a highly questionable fork that obviously doesn't have consensus .... well tada  .
I plan on voting with my services and cranking the faucets transactions up even more... hopefully voting is based on transactions because we can handle that... I think we created the most CLAM transactions as well out of any service at this point.

You don't agree with the network voting on development priorities.
Noted.
However, if you care about the result of a petition, it would benefit you to participate.
Your choice.

I will participate of course with whatever fuckery y'all choose to do of course.
I can just see why a developer with a massive stash of pre made BTC/DOGE wallets for CLAM would like the vote to be based on how many coins ppl own... seems sketchy and feels murky voting with votes based on a your financial status.

See what happens?
You try to be fair and nice and the angry network spamming faucet operator accuses you of cheating.

I've been meaning to fix the fee system to prevent the penny bloat attacks your faucets implement.
Maybe that will be the next petition/vote.
Should have done so immediately after the FIRST exchange wallet you put out of commission.
Or atleast, the SECOND.

The amount of work we've put into the project as volunteers because we simply believe in what we're doing.
After all the money you've made on the back of our work and charity, a person would think you'd have some respect.

The chain is public; look at the data.
I wasn't even aware crypto existed when "the Digger" created his/her wallets.


Alas...

BayAreaCoins will be BayAreaCoins.

Thanks for that BAC.
Remember that the next time you want me to bend over backwards and help you out.

[BayAreaCoins]

See what happens?
You try to be fair and nice and the angry network spamming faucet operator accuses you of cheating.

I'm trying to be fair, nice and not a turd burger.  These are real concerns of myself and other people I speak with privately.

My network spamming faucets are the largest enablers of CLAM on the market.  Thousands of people rely on us to get a little free taste of JD... it's hard to say how many people we have brought into CLAM just by giving them a chance if they weren't around May 12, 2014 for that free chance.

I've been meaning to fix the fee system to prevent the penny bloat attacks your faucets implement.
Maybe that will be the next petition/vote.

Do it .

If you give me a guide line of "set" rules then we will follow them or close the businesses.  No biggie... just do what you are going to do and don't BS us with voting.

Sucks to be following the rules and developers throw wrenches in things .

Should have done so immediately after the FIRST exchange wallet you put out of commission.
Or atleast, the SECOND.

Those shitcoin exchanges didn't have their wallets set up right... that was entirely my fault.

The amount of work we've put into the project as volunteers because we simply believe in what we're doing.

 

If you believed in what you are doing ... why are we taking a vote to kill it?

No one believes you that it wasn't for money gain on your end... it doesn't make any sense.

After all the money you've made on the back of our work and charity, a person would think you'd have some respect.

I made money on my work.  You think you'd have some respect for the people brought in most the major investors and made your shitty little project have some life/services.

The chain is public; look at the data.
I wasn't even aware crypto existed when "the Digger" created his/her wallets.

And I'm sure this is your first Bitcointalk account.  

Alas...

BayAreaCoins will be BayAreaCoins.

Thanks for that BAC.
Remember that the next time you want me to bend over backwards and help you out.

With my tinfoil hat and everything... surely you can see where I'm coming from and why it looks like shit.  I mean we've had this friggin talk before earlier this year when I had a metric fuckton of Clamcoins.

You've been nothing but a burden for me since day almost one.  You've never helped me out and have always been jelly because you felt like I made money off "you" when really it was good trading and hard work.

Up the fees to a dollar, remove digging and do what you will!  La resistance!

[SuperClam]

See what happens?
You try to be fair and nice and the angry network spamming faucet operator accuses you of cheating.

I'm trying to be fair, nice and not a turd burger.  These are real concerns of myself and other people I speak with privately.
My network spamming faucets are the largest enablers of CLAM on the market.  Thousands of people rely on us to get a little free taste of JD... it's hard to say how many people we have brought into CLAM just by giving them a chance if they weren't around May 12, 2014 for that free chance.

I've been meaning to fix the fee system to prevent the penny bloat attacks your faucets implement.
Maybe that will be the next petition/vote.

Do it .
If you give my a guide line of "set" rules then we will follow them or close the businesses.  No biggie... just do what you are going to do and don't BS us with voting.

You stick your finger into the air, and test the wind.

If it suits you, you want a "vote".
Don't you remember your BTTalk poll to comandeer the SuperClam account?

If it doesn't suit you, it's "BS".
Is there anything that you believe without it personally benefiting you?
Purely because it is logical or "right"?

If you give my a guide line of "set" rules then we will follow them or close the businesses.

You can keep your lies.
You were repeatedly asked to send out faucet payments in batches.
You responded by throwing yet another fit.

Should have done so immediately after the FIRST exchange wallet you put out of commission.
Or atleast, the SECOND.

Those shitcoin exchanges didn't have their wallets set up right... that was entirely my fault.

They improved their methodology of sweeping dust.
That is an important change they needed to make anyways.

That doesn't change the fact that you were informed of what your faucets were doing to other services in the community and responded negatively.

The amount of work we've put into the project as volunteers because we simply believe in what we're doing.

If you believed in what you are doing ... why are we taking a vote to kill it?
No one believes you that it wasn't for money gain on your end... it doesn't make any sense.

It is comical to me how you change your position depending on what will benefit you the most personally.

Correction: it doesn't make sense to you.
Refer back to: "If it suits you".

After all the money you've made on the back of our work and charity, a person would think you'd have some respect.

I made money on my work.  You think you'd have some respect for the people brought in most the major investors and made your shitty little project have some life/services.

CLAM's success is entirely your doing.
Thank you.
/s

If the people involved in this community had spent half of the time they've spent babysitting you, on the project itself instead...
I don't believe you have been a net positive.

You've contributed; but, the venom you bring is hardly worth a faucet and second dig service.

The chain is public; look at the data.
I wasn't even aware crypto existed when "the Digger" created his/her wallets.

And I'm sure this is your first Bitcointalk account.  

No, but my creativecuriosity account IS.

Alas...
BayAreaCoins will be BayAreaCoins.
Thanks for that BAC.
Remember that the next time you want me to bend over backwards and help you out.

With my tinfoil hat and everything... surely you can see where I'm coming from and why it looks like shit.  I mean we've had this friggin talk before earlier this year when I had a metric fuckton of Clamcoins.
You've been nothing but a burden for me since day almost one.  You've never helped me out and have always been jelly because you felt like I made money off "you" when really it was good trading and hard work.
Up the fees to a dollar, remove digging and do what you will!  La resistance!

This is likely the most ironic part.
I would likely personally "vote" for "No Change".

You would know that if you had paid attention.

[cryptospout]

I've been meaning to fix the fee system to prevent the penny bloat attacks your faucets implement.
Maybe that will be the next petition/vote.
Should have done so immediately after the FIRST exchange wallet you put out of commission.
Or atleast, the SECOND.

what the hell is that supposed to mean? So what not only is the digger a problem for clam but so are faucets now too?

[SuperClam]

I've been meaning to fix the fee system to prevent the penny bloat attacks your faucets implement.
Maybe that will be the next petition/vote.
Should have done so immediately after the FIRST exchange wallet you put out of commission.
Or atleast, the SECOND.

what the hell is that supposed to mean? So what not only is the digger a problem for clam but so are faucets now too?

Faucets in general aren't.

Frankly, it is a problem with the fee system, which should charge a larger premium for large numbers of tiny sub CLAM outputs.
They bloat the chain for the entire network, similar to changes made in BTC over Satoshi Dice.

Fees are designed to prevent bloat and DDoS attacks.
They are insufficient at the moment to provide adequate protection.

This was the original reason the "complicated" version of my fee system changes were designed.
The idea had nothing at all to do with "the digger", but just happened to have an additional effect of blunting the situation.

Which, is why it was brought up during the conversation about "the digger".